Russians threw the election?

[Wild Cobra]

Funny how these trumptards were so concerned with Hillary and her emails/what she was doing behind closed doors, but are willing to ignore a foreign power blatantly undermining our democracy. :lol

Maybe if facts were presented, instead of hearsay...

[Wild Cobra]

In regards to Russia hacking the democrats. I read the hacked the republicans too. The theory based on them trying to trhrow the election is based on only democrat emails being leaked.

What if there just wasn't anything juicy in the republican emails?

[Winehole23]

Characterizing the opinion of the CIA and the FBI as domestic propaganda is a new suit of clothes for the GOP, but on the extant record WC is right: we have only the professional opinion of US intelligence agencies.

The CIA believes...

[mavsfan1000]

In regards to Russia hacking the democrats. I read the hacked the republicans too. The theory based on them trying to trhrow the election is based on only democrat emails being leaked.

What if there just wasn't anything juicy in the republican emails?
I heard they didn't hack the Republicans. No sign of anything.

[pgardn]

I heard they didn't hack the Republicans. No sign of anything.

Republicans say they were unsuccessfully penetrated.

Operation Chastity Belt worked.

[Spurminator]

In regards to Russia hacking the democrats. I read the hacked the republicans too. The theory based on them trying to trhrow the election is based on only democrat emails being leaked.

What if there just wasn't anything juicy in the republican emails?

There were tens of thousands of Dem emails leaked an a very small percentage of them contained anything of interest.

[hater]

Welcome to the third world niggas :lmao

The CIA has toppled hundreds of 3rd world shithole government. Its ur turn now. Enjoy

[spurraider21]

We've truly become a banana republic.i would disagree, but trump actually got elected, so...

[CosmicCowboy]

There were tens of thousands of Dem emails leaked an a very small percentage of them contained anything of interest.

Good point. So how did the Russians throw the election?

[Spurminator]

Good point. So how did the Russians throw the election?

I didn't claim they did. I'm disputing the ridiculous idea that Wikileaks held back on releasing RNC emails because they weren't juicy enough. If they were only releasing juicy emails, the whole release would have been less than a dozen.

[CosmicCowboy]

LOL Hillary is still in shock and asking herself..."how the hell did I lose to TRUMP? :lmao

[spurraider21]

at least the "i dont like Trump, but..." crowd has dropped the act :lol

[CosmicCowboy]

at least the "i dont like Trump, but..." crowd has dropped the act :lol

I always said I despised Hillary more. I chose not to vote for President and living in Texas that vote didn't count anyway. I can still laugh that that kunt didn't get to be President and I will wish Trump well and hope he doesn't fuck up too bad.

[boutons_deux]

Trump Goes Into Hiding And Cancels Press Conference As Russia Investigation Gains Momentum

President-elect Donald Trump has canceled his first press conference since winning the election as calls grow for a bipartisan investigation into whether or not the Russian government interfered in the 2016 contest.

The cabinet appointments are a flimsy excuse to cover-up the fact that his advisors don’t want Trump to take questions from reporters before the Electoral College votes next week.

Trump is the first president-elect since 1976 not to hold a press conference. (http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/18/media/donald-trump-post-election-news-conference/) Trump last held a press conference on July 27, 2016, which was the same event where he called on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton and release her emails. (http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/27/live-press-conference-trump-asks-putin-hack-find-clinton-emails.html)

Trump tried to cancel on The New York Time (http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/22/trump-5.html)s after they held him to his agreed to on-the-record session.

Trump has avoided taking any questions from the political press in a news conference setting for nearly seven months.

It is not a surprise that Trump would cancel the press conference that he scheduled so he could announce how he will be separating himself from his business interests as president.

The Trump team can’t risk putting him in front a live mic to take questions from reporters about the investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/12/12/trump-hiding-cancels-press-conference-russia-investigation-gains-momentum.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29

[Winehole23]

http://articles.latimes.com/1996-07-09/news/mn-22423_1_boris-yeltsin

[Winehole23]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/13/the-long-history-of-the-u-s-interfering-with-elections-elsewhere/?utm_term=.7afce031ad6d

[Winehole23]

The most infamous episodes include the ousting of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/03/31/the-key-moments-in-the-long-history-of-u-s-iran-tensions/) — whose government was replaced by an authoritarian monarchy favorable to Washington — the removal and assassination of Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba in 1961, and the violent toppling of socialist Chilean President Salvador Allende, whose government was swept aside in 1973 by a military coup led by the ruthless Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

[Winehole23]

In 1954, Washington unseated Guatemala's left-wing president, Jacobo Arbenz, who had had the temerity to challenge the vast control of the United Fruit Co., a U.S. corporation, with agrarian laws that would be fairer to Guatemalan farmers. The CIA went on to install and back a series of right-wing dictatorships that brutalized the impoverished nation for almost half a century.

[Winehole23]

Aside from its instigation of coups and alliances with right-wing juntas, Washington sought to more subtly influence elections in all corners of the world. And so did Moscow. Political scientist Dov Levin (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/09/07/sure-the-u-s-and-russia-often-meddle-in-foreign-elections-does-it-matter/) calculates that the “two powers intervened in 117 elections around the world from 1946 to 2000 — an average of once in every nine competitive elections.”


In the late 1940s, the newly established CIA cut its teeth in Western Europe, pushing back against some of the continent's most influential leftist parties and labor unions. In 1948, the United States propped up Italy's centrist Christian Democrats and helped ensure their electoral victory against a leftist coalition, anchored by one of the most powerful communist parties in Europe. CIA operatives gave millions of dollars (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/06/us/06wyatt.html) to their Italian allies and helped orchestrate what was then an unprecedented, clandestine propaganda campaign (https://williamblum.org/chapters/killing-hope/italy): This included forging documents to besmirch communist leaders via fabricated sex scandals, starting a mass letter-writing campaign from Italian Americans to their compatriots, and spreading hysteria about a Russian takeover and the undermining of the Catholic Church.


“We had bags of money that we delivered to selected politicians, to defray their political expenses, their campaign expenses, for posters, for pamphlets,” recounted F. Mark Wyatt (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/06/us/06wyatt.html), the CIA officer who handled the mission and later participated in more than 2½ decades of direct support to the Christian Democrats.

[Winehole23]

This template spread everywhere (http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/31/us/political-meddling-by-outsiders-not-new-for-us.html): CIA operative Edward G. Lansdale, notorious for his efforts to bring down the North Vietnamese government, is said to have run the successful 1953 campaign of Philippines President Ramon Magsaysay. Japan's center-right Liberal Democratic Party was backed with secret American funds through the 1950s and the 1960s. The U.S. government and American oil corporations helped Christian parties in Lebanon win crucial elections in 1957 with briefcases full of cash.


In Chile, the United States prevented Allende from winning an election in 1964. “A total of nearly four million dollars was spent on some fifteen covert action projects, ranging from organizing slum dwellers to passing funds to political parties,” detailed (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-fein/cias-gold-standard-for-in_b_11201644.html) a Senate inquiry in the mid-1970s that started to expose the role of the CIA in overseas elections. When it couldn't defeat Allende at the ballot box in 1970, Washington decided to remove him anyway.

[Winehole23]

“If the Chinese indeed tried to influence the election here . . . the United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine,” Peter Kornbluh, director of the National Security Archive, which is affiliated with George Washington University, said in a 1997 interview with the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/31/us/political-meddling-by-outsiders-not-new-for-us.html). “China has done little more than emulate a long pattern of U.S. manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world.”

[pgardn]

And Hillary wanted to influence the Palestinian elections. I bet they wish she did.

[Winehole23]

hardly comparable to what I just posted.

what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, no?

[Winehole23]

what goes around comes around?

reap as you sow?

[Wild Cobra]

Trump Goes Into Hiding And Cancels Press Conference As Russia Investigation Gains Momentum

President-elect Donald Trump has canceled his first press conference since winning the election as calls grow for a bipartisan investigation into whether or not the Russian government interfered in the 2016 contest.

The cabinet appointments are a flimsy excuse to cover-up the fact that his advisors don’t want Trump to take questions from reporters before the Electoral College votes next week.

Trump is the first president-elect since 1976 not to hold a press conference. (http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/18/media/donald-trump-post-election-news-conference/) Trump last held a press conference on July 27, 2016, which was the same event where he called on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton and release her emails. (http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/27/live-press-conference-trump-asks-putin-hack-find-clinton-emails.html)

Trump tried to cancel on The New York Time (http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/22/trump-5.html)s after they held him to his agreed to on-the-record session.

Trump has avoided taking any questions from the political press in a news conference setting for nearly seven months.

It is not a surprise that Trump would cancel the press conference that he scheduled so he could announce how he will be separating himself from his business interests as president.

The Trump team can’t risk putting him in front a live mic to take questions from reporters about the investigation into Russia’s meddling in the election.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/12/12/trump-hiding-cancels-press-conference-russia-investigation-gains-momentum.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29


Liar.

He didn't ask for them to hack the emails. He said if they did, he hopes the found the 30,000 missing emails, and that the press wold reward them.

[Thread]

& I do not understand him even entertaining (news conferences). It will be nothing but a (gotcha "question" parade). Just run the gd thing with press releases & Twitter strokes. Media does not mean him well. Recognize that fact and he'll save himself a lot of bullshit.

[CosmicCowboy]

& I do not understand him even entertaining (news conferences). It will be nothing but a (gotcha "question" parade). Just run the gd thing with press releases & Twitter strokes. Media does not mean him well. Recognize that fact and he'll save himself a lot of bullshit.

x2

[boutons_deux]

Don The Con can't handle journalists, or face-to-face confrontations, typical dickless bully, hiding behind tweets.

[Thread]

Don The Con can't handle journalists, or face-to-face confrontations, typical dickless bully, hiding behind tweets.

You know what I'd do if I were Trump? I'd tell Media:::"Fine, I'll give ya's a chance. We'll do a Press Conference. But, we'll do it strictly by Obama Rules=no (gotcha moments). None. If you (gotcha) just once, I'll turn and walk off. And we'll never do another.

Now, Let us proceed..."

[boutons_deux]

Liar.

He didn't ask for them to hack the emails. He said if they did, he hopes the found the 30,000 missing emails, and that the press wold reward them.

:lol to find them, they'd have to hack Hillary's stuff, or would the hackers just politely ask Hillary to give the emails to the hackers?

[Wild Cobra]

:lol to find them, they'd have to hack Hillary's stuff, or would the hackers just politely ask Hillary to give the emails to the hackers?

I see that was a mile over your head.

[boutons_deux]

“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

... "find"? :lol The only finding would be hacking. Wouldn't be an Easter egg hunt.

[Wild Cobra]

“I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

... "find"? :lol The only finding would be hacking. Wouldn't be an Easter egg hunt.





He said that after said "if they hacked" the emails.

You idiot. He didn't ask them to hack.

[boutons_deux]

He said that after said "if they hacked" the emails.

You idiot. He didn't ask them to hack.

"find" in this context is necessarily "hack".

so "I hope you are able to HACK the 30,000 emails ...."

[Winehole23]

Remarkably, only secondary commenters (including me, in point 13 here (https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/12/10/evidence-prove-russian-hack/)) have suggested the most obvious explanation: The likelihood that Russia targeted the former Secretary of State for a series of covert actions, all impacting key Russian interests, that at least started while she was Secretary of State. Those are:




Misleadingly getting the UN to sanction the Libya intervention based off the claim that it was about protecting civilians as opposed to regime change
Generating protests targeting Putin in response to 2011 parliamentary elections
Sponsoring “moderate rebels” to defeat Bashar al-Assad
Removing Viktor Yanukovych to install a pro-NATO government


Importantly, the first three of these happened on Hillary’s watch, with her active involvement. And Putin blamed Hillary, personally, for the protests in 2011.


Never mind the relative merit of these covert operations. Never mind that Putin has not, yet, released any evidence to support his claim that Hillary (or CIA) supported the 2011 protests targeting him personally; there is no doubt he believes it. During the primary Hillary as much as confirmed that when her diplomats negotiated the UN voted in 2011, they had regime change in mind the whole time. The US has acknowledged its covert operations against Assad in Congressional testimony. And hackers released a call from Victoria Nuland acting like she was in charge of deciding what post-Yanukovych Ukraine would look like.

https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/12/12/cia-avoiding-conclusion-putin-hacked-hillary-retaliate-covert-actions/

[Winehole23]

anonymous sources in the ODNI refuse to endorse the CIA's conclusions:


The overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment that Russian cyber attacks were aimed at helping Republican President-elect Donald Trump win the 2016 election, three American officials said on Monday.


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

[FromWayDowntown]

I think the need to get to the bottom of this is wholly independent of whether or not it had any effect on the election or even whether it was intended to have any effect.

[Big Empty]

After I learned of a tax break, I turned Republican for the first time in my 39 years of life. This must have been how Judas felt when he sold his soul for some coin. Screw it. Lets see what a Republican run country can do in 4 years. They only thing the Russians did was let me know I was a taco bowl voter. It didn't sway my Hillary support at the time. Just the tax break. I lost a few close friends when I posted a selfie at the election polls with a Make America Great Again Trump hat on. (offcials made me take it off) Liberals.....:D AHH That felt cool to say.

[Winehole23]

I think the need to get to the bottom of this is wholly independent of whether or not it had any effect on the election or even whether it was intended to have any effect.Sure, why not?

[hater]

Yup NIA and FBI agree that the CIA conclusion is nothing but politized bull shit of the first order

Besides US interfered with hundreds of elections, why are they crying bloody murder then???

Hypocrites

[Fabbs]

All the attention on whether Russia hacked to effect Pres Finals.
How about the semi Finals where Bernie got burned.
Lets investigate that to the 10th power.

[Wild Cobra]

"find" in this context is necessarily "hack".

so "I hope you are able to HACK the 30,000 emails ...."

You didn't listen to the video I see.

[baseline bum]

After I learned of a tax break, I turned Republican for the first time in my 39 years of life. This must have been how Judas felt when he sold his soul for some coin. Screw it. Lets see what a Republican run country can do in 4 years. They only thing the Russians did was let me know I was a taco bowl voter. It didn't sway my Hillary support at the time. Just the tax break. I lost a few close friends when I posted a selfie at the election polls with a Make America Great Again Trump hat on. (offcials made me take it off) Liberals.....:D AHH That felt cool to say.

It took you 39 years to figure out Republicans always push for tax cuts?

[boutons_deux]

You didn't listen to the video I see.

the quoted text is not what he said? Or is this just another of "context" and "intent" bullshitting?

[TheSanityAnnex]

Faith-based AttributionEvery network attack against a company like Sony Entertainment, an organization like the DNC, or a government agency like OPM, comes with a series of questions to be answered, including the obvious ones like when did it begin? What was taken? Who was responsible? Are the attackers out of my network?


Attribution, simply put, purports to answer the question of who is responsible. For example, CrowdStrike investigated the DNC network breach and determined that the Russian government was responsible. FireEye investigated the Sony Entertainment network attack and determined that the North Korean government was responsible.


It’s important to know that the process of attributing an attack by a cybersecurity company has nothing to do with the scientific method. Claims of attribution aren’t testable or repeatable because the hypothesis is never proven right or wrong.
Neither are claims of attribution admissible in any criminal case, so those who make the claim don’t have to abide by any rules of evidence (i.e., hearsay, relevance, admissibility).


The closest analogy for a cybersecurity company’s assignment of attribution is an intelligence estimate, however intelligence analysts who write those estimates are held accountable for their hits and misses. If the miss is big enough (No WMDs in Iraq, missed India’s five nuclear bomb tests in ’98, missed Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, etc.), there are consequences, and perhaps a Congressional investigation.


When it comes to cybersecurity estimates of attribution, no one holds the company that makes the claim accountable because there’s no way to prove whether the assignment of attribution is true or false unless (1) there is a criminal conviction, (2) the hacker is caught (https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/10/31/georgia-hacker-photographed/) in the act, or (3) a government employee leaked (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/28/general-cartwright-investigated-stuxnet-leak) the evidence.


In fact, when looking at professions who use an investigative process to determine a true and accurate answer, the closest profession to the attribution estimate of a cyber intelligence analyst is that of a religious office like a priest or a minister, who simply asks their congregation to believe what they say on faith. The likelihood that a nation state will acknowledge that a cybersecurity company has correctly identified one of their operations is probably slightly less likely than God making an appearance at the venue where a theological debate is underway about whether God exists.

Unstructured or Structured Analysis?Many of the cyber intelligence analysts who work at companies like CrowdStrike, FireEye, and Mandiant have come out of the military or the Intelligence Community with prior analytic training.
So the quickest way to get to the heart of how these companies assign attribution is to look at how intelligence analysis was done during that time. Fortunately for us, Maj. Robert D. Folker, Jr. (USAF) did precisely that with his January, 2000 paper “Intelligence Analysis In Theater Joint Intelligence Centers: An Experiment In Applying Structured Methods (https://fas.org/irp/eprint/folker.pdf)” published by the Joint Military Intelligence College.


Folker believed that adding structure to the analytic process would result in superior results over the vastly more popular but frequently flawed intuitive approach. He gathered 26 active duty volunteers from Joint Intelligence Centers who were then divided into a Control group and an Experimental group. The Experimental group was given one hour of training in hypothesis testing, a structured methodology. The Control group wasn’t.
Notice what Folker observed in the Control group:


After reading the scenarios members of the control group formed a conclusion, then went back to the scenario to find evidence that supported their conclusion and ignored contradictory evidence. When asked to justify their answers, analysts in the control group often cited some “key” information that gave them a flash of insight.And the Experimental group:

Members of the experimental group examined all evidence provided in the scenario prior to making their decision. They felt confident that they were making the best decision they could with the amount of information available. They acknowledged that their decision may not be the right one and added that if more evidence became available they would reevaluate their conclusion taking into account this new information.Keep in mind that this study was done in 1999, when many of today’s cybersecurity professionals were serving in the military as intelligence analysts or investigators so it isn’t surprising that the same approach is frequently applied by cyber intelligence analysts today.


Unfortunately, cyber analysts who apply 20 year old habits to their attribution effort should pay more attention to what modern science has taught the IC about how the brain processes information; i.e., the impact of cognitive bias. IARPA, for example, has funded research into mitigating biases with gameplay (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Benjamin_Clegg/publication/264158816_Game-based_Training_to_Mitigate_Three_Forms_of_Cognitiv e_Bias/links/54872cd50cf268d28f071d88.pdf). Or you could just read “Thinking Fast and Slow (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol.-56-no.-2/thinking-fast-and-slow.html)” by Daniel Kahneman.


Even if cyber intelligence managers and analysts were trained to apply the latest techniques to counter things like fundamental attribution error, confirmation bias, and bias blindspot, they would still have a huge deficit to overcome — the inability to measure the accuracy of their assessments.


Imagine taking an SAT test, turning it in at the end, and then being told that you have to assess your own grade based upon how well you think you did. And you never receive an official score. Would you hire any professional who couldn’t produce independently verifiable results of his proficiency? Of course not.


The solution to this problem is a simple one. If you can prove attribution, do it.

If you can’t, say so.


Just don’t claim the equivalent of a 1600 SAT score and expect us to take it on faith.

https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/faith-based-attribution-30f4a658eabc#.dv8mfrjjt

[pgardn]

hardly comparable to what I just posted.

what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, no?

its the notion of just suggesting it that is telling.

[Wild Cobra]

the quoted text is not what he said? Or is this just another of "context" and "intent" bullshitting?

And you believe a lying reporter that the words are accurate...

You should listen yourself instead of regurgitating the lies of others.

[Winehole23]

its the notion of just suggesting it that is telling.suggesting what? That we're receiving the same treatment we gave, and continue to give, others?

Does that offend you?

[Winehole23]

Get to the bottom of it, sure, and give em hell right back, but this should surprise no one.

[pgardn]

suggesting what? That we're receiving the same treatment we gave, and continue to give, others?

Does that offend you?

Suggesting that we rig the Palestinian elections...

Yes. It offends me. As she just ran for president.

[Winehole23]

Well, as it happens, we did rig that election in a way.

We insisted Hamas be allowed to participate.

[Winehole23]

Condi Rice and GWB did the insisting.

[Winehole23]

Ain't history weird?

[boutons_deux]

NPR/Diane Rehm had VERY interesting guests + program this morning.

Comey knew about Russians in the Dem machines for months, let them stay in there, but said nothing, saying he didn't want to influence the election. :lol

The hackers carefully dribbled out the Dem emails, etc week by week to counter any moves by Hillary. The emails kept getting media attention ahead of Hillary's campaign.

With the above info about Comey, plus Comey's two trashings of Hillary, I think he was influential enough to put Trash in the WH, alone. But coupled with the Russians efforts, Comey had plenty of help.

[RandomGuy]

:lol

Even if they did hack and publish the emails...

We got to read the real facts without any media filter. I think it's hilarious that hard cores like Boo and Reck are incensed by FACTS being published that gave people more information before they voted.

I assume from their outrage that they would prefer fewer FACTS and just have voters rely on candidate and media spin.

How dare they let people know what was really going on with our elections! :lol

You just did the intellectual equivalent of flag burning.

An authoritarian government whose stated position is that the idea of democracy is simply some sort of plot to overthrow them, has undertaken a DIRECT assault on our democracy, and because it benefitted the party you support, your position is "oh well".

There are some things that should go beyond party, and this is it.

You just put party over country, which is about as unpatriotic as it gets. That makes me deeply ashamed that some Americans like you completely abdicate the most basic civic duty of our country.

If you don't like the country, please get the fuck out.

[RandomGuy]

All this hysteria and still no iron-clad, undeniable proof that the Russians "hacked" anything at all. The liberals who peddle this drivel are almost as bad as the Pizzagate nutjobs.

The evidence is as conclusive as it gets.

The conservatives who buy the "we just can't know" drivel, are as bad as the "faked moon landings" morons, who "just have questions" about the "official story".

Your post is about as "blame the other guy for your own faults" as it gets. Sorry, not buying your pathetic attempt at deflection.

[RandomGuy]

.

[RandomGuy]

.

[RandomGuy]

Be wise if our own government would stop being involved first.

So, do you have a problem with foreign governments actively trying to meddle in, and discredit, US elections?

Yes or no will do.

[boutons_deux]

It's hilarious how the ST rightwingnutjobs are now pro-Russia and Pootin-fellators (remember, they trashed Obama because he didn't manspread like Pootin).

My guess is that both Don the Con and his "Friend of Russia" were compromised while they were in Moscow.

Trash, in town for his booty contest, was given plenty of contestants and Russian pussy to grab.

Pootin probably got recordings of Trash fucking one or more Russian girls or booty contestants. And why not Tillerson?

OBL outsmarted the US, and I have no doubt that ex-KGB Pootin and his ex-KGB hitmen have outsmarted Trash, Tillerson, and USA.

And ST assholes are all OK with it.

[CosmicCowboy]

Lots of butt hurt in here today :lol

[Thread]

It's hilarious how the ST rightwingnutjobs are now pro-Russia and Pootin-fellators (remember, they trashed Obama because he didn't manspread like Pootin).

My guess is that both Don the Con and his "Friend of Russia" were compromised while they were in Moscow.

Trash, in town for his booty contest, was given plenty of contestants and Russian pussy to grab.

Pootin probably got recordings of Trash fucking one or more Russian girls or booty contestants. And why not Tillerson?

OBL outsmarted the US, and I have no doubt that ex-KGB Pootin and his ex-KGB hitmen have outsmarted Trash, Tillerson, and USA.

And ST assholes are all OK with it.

Speaking only for myself:::I am absolutely fine with it. We've as much blood on our collective hands as the next asshole in the long line.

[Thread]

The evidence is as conclusive as it gets.

The conservatives who buy the "we just can't know" drivel, are as bad as the "faked moon landings" morons, who "just have questions" about the "official story".

Your post is about as "blame the other guy for your own faults" as it gets. Sorry, not buying your pathetic attempt at deflection.

& yet Barry never uttered one word about this during the heights of the campaign. No demand that Russia stop,,,No demand for immediate investigations,,,No demand for immediate Senate hearings. Nothing. Kept his mouth shut while Russia burned Hillary to the ground.

[Thread]

So, do you have a problem with foreign governments actively trying to meddle in, and discredit, US elections?

Yes or no will do.

When it butters my bread ('16) I've nary problem with it.

When it doesn't feather my cap ('08/'12) I demand it stop.

I don't give a good shit how the Lakers win the last game played in June. And I don't give a shit how Trump gets to the point of raising his hand come January.

- "Git 'er down, dude, just git 'er done."

- John Travolta - "Carrie"

[boutons_deux]

Harry Reid Goes There About Comey (http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/12/12/1610191/-Harry-Reid-Goes-There-About-Comey)

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said Monday FBI Director James Comey was "heavily involved as a partisan" in the weeks leading up to the election and that Comey's actions handed the presidency to Donald Trump.

The retiring Nevada Democrat said Democrats "would have won the majority in the Senate and would have won the presidency but for Comey."

Reid also states that they asked the FBI to condemn Russian hacking and how it was and the FBI refused to do so

"I am saying the FBI did nothing -- did nothing.

All the information that we've heard in the last couple weeks, it was available to the FBI.

He just ignored it.

He did not make it public.

We asked him to more than once and he didn't do it,"

Reid said.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/12/1610191/-Harry-Reid-Goes-There-About-Comey?detail=email&link_id=3&can_id=4217e8eb109c68bd0c2e4143dd2d8c15&source=email-trump-shuns-scientists-taps-dancing-with-the-stars-contestant-to-oversee-nuclear-weapons&email_referrer=trump-shuns-scientists-taps-dancing-with-the-stars-contestant-to-oversee-nuclear-weapons&email_subject=trump-shuns-scientists-taps-dancing-with-the-stars-contestant-to-oversee-nuclear-weapons

[RandomGuy]

Lots of butt hurt in here today :lol

Either foreign governments meddling in US elections is a problem for you or it isn't?

If you don't think it is a problem, that's on you, especially because of the chickenshit way you rationalize it.

[RandomGuy]

& yet Barry never uttered one word about this during the heights of the campaign. No demand that Russia stop,,,No demand for immediate investigations,,,No demand for immediate Senate hearings. Nothing. Kept his mouth shut while Russia burned Hillary to the ground.

It came up repeatedly.

It was the Republican party that tried to bury the story.

[Thread]

It came up repeatedly.

It was the Republican party that tried to bury the story.

Barry never made a Presidential issue of it. He's the POTUS. He should have demanded that Russia stop, and if it continued, all options would be on the table. But, instead he turned a deaf ear to it. Why? I don't know. Hoping it would go away? Hoping that it wouldn't turn enough ballots to cause Hillary to lose? Hoping that it wouldn't get any worse?

It was on his watch. He is the POTUS. He failed Hillary. He failed us/me withstanding. Of course Media doesn't call him on it. Not even Conservative channels. Not a word of indictment.

[Thread]

Either foreign governments meddling in US elections is a problem for you or it isn't?

If you don't think it is a problem, that's on you, especially because of the chickenshit way you rationalize it.

We've been meddling in the world's elections for umpteenth years. We've been cited for it time & again. And we've skinned & grinned our way away from the incident(s).

How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot? I'll tell ya how:::like shaved pussy.

[boutons_deux]

It came up repeatedly.

It was the Republican party that tried to bury the story.

Actually, the NPR program guests said this morning that of course the Obama/DoJ knew all about the Russian hacking months ago

I expect Obama didn't want to be see to be (ab)using his power to influence the election,

but,

FUCK IT, he's sworn to defend the Constitution and the USA.

The Russians were actually WARRING on the USA and he did nothing.

[Thread]

Harry Reid Goes There About Comey (http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/12/12/1610191/-Harry-Reid-Goes-There-About-Comey)

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said Monday FBI Director James Comey was "heavily involved as a partisan" in the weeks leading up to the election and that Comey's actions handed the presidency to Donald Trump.

The retiring Nevada Democrat said Democrats "would have won the majority in the Senate and would have won the presidency but for Comey."

Reid also states that they asked the FBI to condemn Russian hacking and how it was and the FBI refused to do so

"I am saying the FBI did nothing -- did nothing.

All the information that we've heard in the last couple weeks, it was available to the FBI.

He just ignored it.

He did not make it public.

We asked him to more than once and he didn't do it,"

Reid said.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/12/1610191/-Harry-Reid-Goes-There-About-Comey?detail=email&link_id=3&can_id=4217e8eb109c68bd0c2e4143dd2d8c15&source=email-trump-shuns-scientists-taps-dancing-with-the-stars-contestant-to-oversee-nuclear-weapons&email_referrer=trump-shuns-scientists-taps-dancing-with-the-stars-contestant-to-oversee-nuclear-weapons&email_subject=trump-shuns-scientists-taps-dancing-with-the-stars-contestant-to-oversee-nuclear-weapons



Reid has nobody to blame but himself & Barry. They politicized these government arms,,,CIA, FBI, DOJ have all been politicized & corrupted under their watch. Why did this happen? Because they couldn't process their agenda thru proper protocols. They didn't have the might,,,MOST IMPORTANTLY THOUGH:::They didn't have the fucking patience. So they cheated the system and now the chickens have come home to roost.

I've no sympathy for them.

[Thread]

Actually, the NPR program guests said this morning that of course the Obama/DoJ knew all about the Russian hacking months ago

I expect Obama didn't want to be see to be (ab)using his power to influence the election,

but,

FUCK IT, he's sworn to defend the Constitution and the USA.

The Russians were actually WARRING on the USA and he did nothing.

bouts

[RandomGuy]

Barry never made a Presidential issue of it. ..He should have demanded that Russia stop, and if it continued, all options would be on the table. But, instead he turned a deaf ear to it.

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.

[Thread]

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.


Obviously because it intensified.

[Clipper Nation]

The evidence is as conclusive as it gets.

The FBI and ODNI disagree with you there.

[RandomGuy]

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.


Obviously because it intensified.

That doesn't tell me how you know. That simply doubles down on your earlier claim.

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.

[boutons_deux]

The FBI and ODNI disagree with you there.

the FBI is compromised and Repug Comey epitomizes that FBI disaster, with his two political hit jobs on Hillary.

ODNI agrees that the hacking was done, but not with the "motive" getting Trash elected.

That's fucking stupid, given that the only stuff hacked and released hurt Hillary, and it was released weekly, to keep hitting Hillary.

NOTHING was released from the Repug machines.

[RandomGuy]

The FBI and ODNI disagree with you there.

No, they don't. They are fully in agreement.

Again, lie all you want to yourself, just stop pissing on my shoes like I am too dumb to see your piss for what it is.

[elbamba]

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.


If he did, Putin treated that demand like all other communications with Obama. He ignored it. Obama was weak with Russia.

I know he tried to use it as a zinger but his comment to Romney in the 2012 debates did shed light that he didn't seem to think that Russia was our biggest geopolitical threat.

[Clipper Nation]

Turns out Podesta's emails leaked out because he clicked on an obvious phishing link, after one of his advisors accidentally told him that it was legitimate instead of illegitimate:


An extensive New York Times report (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/russia-hack-election-dnc.html?mtrref=t.co&_r=0) on this summer's catastrophic email hack of the Democratic National Committee has turned up a very embarrassing detail about how the attack took place. It was reported at the time that Clinton campaign manager John Podesta fell victim to a phishing scheme — specifically a fake "account reset" appearing to be from Google — but it now seems that a typo from one of Podesta's aides may have played a crucial role in ensuring that email's success.

When the phishing email first arrived, Podesta referred it to a number of aides. An aide named Charles Delavan replied, "This is a legitimate email. John needs to change his password immediately." But according to the Times report, that email was a simple flub — at least according to the aide in question. Delavan says he knew the email was a fraud, based on similar phishing attempts that had been spotted and blocked. He had meant to write "illegitimate email," and simply mistyped. On that recommendation, the email was opened and the account was compromised, resulting in the publication of Podesta's archive. Unaffiliated trolls subsequently used information from the emails to compromise Podesta's iCloud account and remotely wipe his iPhone and iPad.

The result has to be one of the more consequential typos of the year. According to the Times, it's an error that "has plagued [Delavan] ever since."

http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/13/13940514/dnc-email-hack-typo-john-podesta-clinton-russia


:lmao Thank goodness these morons aren't running the country. No wonder they want to blame it all on Russia - the alternative is admitting that none of them know how to use a computer in 2016.

[RandomGuy]

:lmao Thank goodness these morons aren't running the country....- the alternative is admitting that none of them know how to use a computer in 2016.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Coj6H1FXEAAQEvI.jpg


:lmao :lmao :lmao

[elbamba]

It came up repeatedly.

It was the Republican party that tried to bury the story.

The story was never buried. The American people just didn't care. If someone other than Hilliary was running, it might have been a bigger story. However, Clinton was involved in her own pay to play scandal. The options were pretty limited this past election when it comes to electing someone with the moral high ground.

[Clipper Nation]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Coj6H1FXEAAQEvI.jpg


:lmao :lmao :lmao


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Rha6Wamfp0

[RandomGuy]

https://s.bsd.net/jimhimes/main/page/-/himes.trumpquote.png

DUR, I'm duh president, and I have very big words.

[boutons_deux]

"Clinton was involved in her own pay to play scandal."

why wasn't she charged? because it was all fabricated and hyped by the Repugs

Benghazi! :lol

btw

House Benghazi committee files final report and shuts down

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/house-benghazi-committee-files-final-report-and-shuts-down/95336692/

Benghazi! :lol

and Trash and Hillary are equally "immoral"?

[Thread]

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.



That doesn't tell me how you know. That simply doubles down on your earlier claim.

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.

You're being obtuse now.

[RandomGuy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Rha6Wamfp0

Hilllary definitely was just as stupid about computers as Donald.

You got that one right.

Too bad for you that Trump is dumber in so many other ways. It will be fun pushing your face in the puppy shit quotes this guy is going to leave for the next few years.

[RandomGuy]

You're being obtuse now.

So you don't know that Obama didn't communicate anything. I do understand.

[Clipper Nation]

One candidate just used social media and the Internet to meme his way into the White House.

The other candidate? Well...


Whereas President Barack Obama has long publicly cultivated his geek persona, embracing new technologies, trying new tools and generally trying to prove his tech savvy, Hillary Clinton comes across in the FBI interviews as a disengaged tech user who sees the communication tools as little more than a means to an end. She has, according to multiple aides, never even learned how to use a desktop computer. Clinton regularly pumped those around her for help with her devices—even those, as her long-time aide Philippe Reines joked to the FBI, whose job had "zero percent" of their responsibilities focused on IT. Reines, whose name is redacted in the FBI files but whose identity is easily discernible, "likened it to your parents asking for technical help with their phone or computer."

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/hillary-clinton-emails-2016-server-state-department-fbi-214307


:lmao Just give it up, you're not going to win this argument.

[Thread]

The story was never buried. The American people just didn't care. If someone other than Hilliary was running, it might have been a bigger story. However, Clinton was involved in her own pay to play scandal. The options were pretty limited this past election when it comes to electing someone with the moral high ground.

Exactly. Like in "Jaws" that one part:::"You say 'barracuda,' everyone says 'Huh?' 'What?'"

"You saw 'shark' and we have a panic on the 4th of July."

---

Same thing with this:::"You say 'Wiki Leaks' everybody is saying 'huh?' 'what?'"

You say::::"Huma sits on Hillary's face every nite." And you have 30 million guys and one old fuck in AZ., beatin' their meat."

[boutons_deux]

Russians are also messing around in Germany and France politics, and apparently were involved in the Brexit election.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Suggesting that we rig the Palestinian elections...

Yes. It offends me. As she just ran for president.

V3mC2wl_W1c

[boutons_deux]

Y'alls adorable St Ronnie the Diseased fucked up Central America, and it's still fucked up, spilling political refugees over USA's border.

And Nixon/Kissenger overthrew Allende in 1973.

And Eisenhauer/CIA overthrew Iran's democratically elected Mossadegh in 1953

[Wild Cobra]

Lots of butt hurt in here today :lol

I think the left ran out of Preparation H shortly after early November.

[Wild Cobra]

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.


We don't know.

I just had a random though (pun intended.)

What if Russia hacked for their own protection? Here we have the left, demonizing Russia. Wouldn't we do the same to them if one of their parties demonized us during an election? Wouldn't we want to know what the internal, possible president, is saying?

Maybe they found things out they didn't like, so they did seek to destroy her presidency. Wouldn't that be of her own making?

Suck talk the left has had about Crimea, Ukraine, Syria, etc. has been very harsh against them.

Can anyone blame them if this is why?

[TheSanityAnnex]

We don't know.

I just had a random though (pun intended.)

What if Russia hacked for their own protection? Here we have the left, demonizing Russia. Wouldn't we do the same to them if one of their parties demonized us during an election? Wouldn't we want to know what the internal, possible president, is saying?

Maybe they found things out they didn't like, so they did seek to destroy her presidency. Wouldn't that be of her own making?

Suck talk the left has had about Crimea, Ukraine, Syria, etc. has been very harsh against them.

Can anyone blame them if this is why?

Here's a random thought. What if it wasn't even Russia who did the hacking. What if it was Israel's Unit 8200 who hacked it and made it look like Russia. Netanyahu could still be pissed Obama fucked with their elections and still isn't happy about the Iranian deal. They've got more to gain with a Trump presidency than Russia.

[DMC]

Hilllary definitely was just as stupid about computers as Donald.

You got that one right.

Too bad for you that Trump is dumber in so many other ways. It will be fun pushing your face in the puppy shit quotes this guy is going to leave for the next few years.

I'm sure you're glad Trump one, since you get to do the puppy shit thing. Lucky you.

[DMC]

Here's a random thought. What if it wasn't even Russia who did the hacking. What if it was Israel's Unit 8200 who hacked it and made it look like Russia. Netanyahu could still be pissed Obama fucked with their elections and still isn't happy about the Iranian deal. They've got more to gain with a Trump presidency than Russia.

What if it was Wild Cobra who hacked it?

[Th'Pusher]

... he [Obama] didn't seem to think that Russia was our biggest geopolitical threat.

Seems that's something he and Donald agree on.

[SnakeBoy]

So why is the intelligence community (supposedly) leaking info to the media but refusing to brief congress on what they actually know?

Any guesses?

[pgardn]

So why is the intelligence community (supposedly) leaking info to the media but refusing to brief congress on what they actually know?

Any guesses?

Coming up.
And they "leaked" it to the president.

[TheSanityAnnex]

So why is the intelligence community (supposedly) leaking info to the media but refusing to brief congress on what they actually know?

Any guesses?
If they know it's not Russia they'd be breaking the law telling congress it is Russia.

[Th'Pusher]

If they know it's not Russia they'd be breaking the law telling congress it is Russia.

The only people who dispute the hacking was executed by Russia are Donald and you.

[TheSanityAnnex]

The only people who dispute the hacking wasn't executed by Russia are Donald and you.Julian Assange said it was not Russia.

I've never said it wasn't Russia. I'm waiting for anyone to offer proof it was Russia.

[Th'Pusher]

Julian Assange said it was not Russia.

I've never said it wasn't Russia. I'm waiting for anyone to offer proof it was Russia.

:lol at TSA taking a measured approach

Both the FBI and CIA agree Russia did the hacking. The only disagreement is the intent.

[Th'Pusher]

Julian Assange said it was not Russia.

I've never said it wasn't Russia. I'm waiting for anyone to offer proof it was Russia.

And show me the quote where assange said it was definitively not Russia.

[TheSanityAnnex]

And show me the quote where assange said it was definitively not Russia.
Assange has similarly disputed that charges that Wikileaks received the leaked emails from Russian sources.
'The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything,' Assange told John Pilger during an interview in November.
'Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That's false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source.'




now show me your named FBI and CIA source saying they know with 100% certainty it was Russia.

[Th'Pusher]

Assange has similarly disputed that charges that Wikileaks received the leaked emails from Russian sources.
'The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything,' Assange told John Pilger during an interview in November.
'Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That's false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source.'




now show me your named FBI and CIA source saying they know with 100% certainty it was Russia.

Assange's statement has a lot of wiggle room, tbh.

WRT FBI and CIA named sources, you know how this works. Don't play coy.

I'm not saying to accept the news without healthy skepticism, but The fact that the Intelligence community agrees on the source of the hacks but disagrees on intent is telling.

[Th'Pusher]

In any event, Obama is right. We need a full investigation into Russia's involvement. You'd agree with that wouldn't you, TSA?

[TheSanityAnnex]

Assange's statement has a lot of wiggle room, tbh.

WRT FBI and CIA named sources, you know how this works. Don't play coy.

I'm not saying to accept the news without healthy skepticism, but The fact that the Intelligence community agrees on the source of the hacks but disagrees on intent is telling.
Posted this yesterday.

Faith-based Attribution

Every network attack against a company like Sony Entertainment, an organization like the DNC, or a government agency like OPM, comes with a series of questions to be answered, including the obvious ones like when did it begin? What was taken? Who was responsible? Are the attackers out of my network?


Attribution, simply put, purports to answer the question of who is responsible. For example, CrowdStrike investigated the DNC network breach and determined that the Russian government was responsible. FireEye investigated the Sony Entertainment network attack and determined that the North Korean government was responsible.


It’s important to know that the process of attributing an attack by a cybersecurity company has nothing to do with the scientific method. Claims of attribution aren’t testable or repeatable because the hypothesis is never proven right or wrong.
Neither are claims of attribution admissible in any criminal case, so those who make the claim don’t have to abide by any rules of evidence (i.e., hearsay, relevance, admissibility).


The closest analogy for a cybersecurity company’s assignment of attribution is an intelligence estimate, however intelligence analysts who write those estimates are held accountable for their hits and misses. If the miss is big enough (No WMDs in Iraq, missed India’s five nuclear bomb tests in ’98, missed Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, etc.), there are consequences, and perhaps a Congressional investigation.


When it comes to cybersecurity estimates of attribution, no one holds the company that makes the claim accountable because there’s no way to prove whether the assignment of attribution is true or false unless (1) there is a criminal conviction, (2) the hacker is caught (https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2012/10/31/georgia-hacker-photographed/) in the act, or (3) a government employee leaked (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/28/general-cartwright-investigated-stuxnet-leak) the evidence.


In fact, when looking at professions who use an investigative process to determine a true and accurate answer, the closest profession to the attribution estimate of a cyber intelligence analyst is that of a religious office like a priest or a minister, who simply asks their congregation to believe what they say on faith. The likelihood that a nation state will acknowledge that a cybersecurity company has correctly identified one of their operations is probably slightly less likely than God making an appearance at the venue where a theological debate is underway about whether God exists.

Unstructured or Structured Analysis?

Many of the cyber intelligence analysts who work at companies like CrowdStrike, FireEye, and Mandiant have come out of the military or the Intelligence Community with prior analytic training.
So the quickest way to get to the heart of how these companies assign attribution is to look at how intelligence analysis was done during that time. Fortunately for us, Maj. Robert D. Folker, Jr. (USAF) did precisely that with his January, 2000 paper “Intelligence Analysis In Theater Joint Intelligence Centers: An Experiment In Applying Structured Methods (https://fas.org/irp/eprint/folker.pdf)” published by the Joint Military Intelligence College.


Folker believed that adding structure to the analytic process would result in superior results over the vastly more popular but frequently flawed intuitive approach. He gathered 26 active duty volunteers from Joint Intelligence Centers who were then divided into a Control group and an Experimental group. The Experimental group was given one hour of training in hypothesis testing, a structured methodology. The Control group wasn’t.
Notice what Folker observed in the Control group:

After reading the scenarios members of the control group formed a conclusion, then went back to the scenario to find evidence that supported their conclusion and ignored contradictory evidence. When asked to justify their answers, analysts in the control group often cited some “key” information that gave them a flash of insight.
And the Experimental group:
Members of the experimental group examined all evidence provided in the scenario prior to making their decision. They felt confident that they were making the best decision they could with the amount of information available. They acknowledged that their decision may not be the right one and added that if more evidence became available they would reevaluate their conclusion taking into account this new information.
Keep in mind that this study was done in 1999, when many of today’s cybersecurity professionals were serving in the military as intelligence analysts or investigators so it isn’t surprising that the same approach is frequently applied by cyber intelligence analysts today.


Unfortunately, cyber analysts who apply 20 year old habits to their attribution effort should pay more attention to what modern science has taught the IC about how the brain processes information; i.e., the impact of cognitive bias. IARPA, for example, has funded research into mitigating biases with gameplay (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Benjamin_Clegg/publication/264158816_Game-based_Training_to_Mitigate_Three_Forms_of_Cognitiv e_Bias/links/54872cd50cf268d28f071d88.pdf). Or you could just read “Thinking Fast and Slow (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol.-56-no.-2/thinking-fast-and-slow.html)” by Daniel Kahneman.


Even if cyber intelligence managers and analysts were trained to apply the latest techniques to counter things like fundamental attribution error, confirmation bias, and bias blindspot, they would still have a huge deficit to overcome — the inability to measure the accuracy of their assessments.


Imagine taking an SAT test, turning it in at the end, and then being told that you have to assess your own grade based upon how well you think you did. And you never receive an official score. Would you hire any professional who couldn’t produce independently verifiable results of his proficiency? Of course not.


The solution to this problem is a simple one. If you can prove attribution, do it.

If you can’t, say so.


Just don’t claim the equivalent of a 1600 SAT score and expect us to take it on faith.

https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/fait...abc#.dv8mfrjjt (https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/faith-based-attribution-30f4a658eabc#.dv8mfrjjt)

[TheSanityAnnex]

In any event, Obama is right. We need a full investigation into Russia's involvement. You'd agree with that wouldn't you, TSA?
Agreed. Along with China, Israel etc.

[boutons_deux]

How do you know Obama didn't communicate a demand for it to stop? Do tell.


There was a meeting months ago, 4 Congressional leaders, Obama, intel. Everybody wanted to go public with the hacking, but Bitch McConnell vetoed, saying it would influence the election.

[Thread]

There was a meeting months ago, 4 Congressional leaders, Obama, intel. Everybody wanted to go public with the hacking, but Bitch McConnell vetoed, saying it would influence the election.

Barry is the POTUS. This is on him. Let him own it. He's a big boy---he can handle it. tee, hee.

[Rust Cohle]

Julian Assange said it was not Russia.
Seems legit. He has no dog in this fight. It's not like he has rape charges to fight and desperately needs Trump to pardon him.

[Wild Cobra]

Here's a random thought. What if it wasn't even Russia who did the hacking. What if it was Israel's Unit 8200 who hacked it and made it look like Russia. Netanyahu could still be pissed Obama fucked with their elections and still isn't happy about the Iranian deal. They've got more to gain with a Trump presidency than Russia.

The thing is, it could have been anyone. Speculation is not good enough.

[Wild Cobra]

So why is the intelligence community (supposedly) leaking info to the media but refusing to brief congress on what they actually know?

Any guesses?

That sometimes when the media claims to have an unnamed source, they are just making shit up.

[Wild Cobra]

The only people who dispute the hacking was executed by Russia are Donald and you.

Really?

It seems to me any anyone with a decent IQ understands there is no factual evidence that Russia did it.

[Wild Cobra]

I've never said it wasn't Russia. I'm waiting for anyone to offer proof it was Russia.

Same here.

It might of been Russia, but until someone offer proof... Only idiots believe it was.

[Wild Cobra]

:lol at TSA taking a measured approach

Both the FBI and CIA agree Russia did the hacking. The only disagreement is the intent.

Who put their career on the line to say that?

Please. Who said that.

What are their names and positions, or do you Just believe anything a left leaning journals says?

[Wild Cobra]

I'm not saying to accept the news without healthy skepticism, but The fact that the Intelligence community agrees on the source of the hacks but disagrees on intent is telling.

What is the reputation for accuracy of the reporter(s) that say that?

[Wild Cobra]

In any event, Obama is right. We need a full investigation into Russia's involvement. You'd agree with that wouldn't you, TSA?

How do you do that withut covert actions, that are increasingly hard after making the idea public?

It would be monumentally stupid to actually do that.

Seems like a well crafted false flag PR stunt to me.

[MultiTroll]

Assange

Seems legit. He has no dog in this fight. It's not like he has rape charges to fight and desperately needs Trump to pardon him.

[Thread]

How do you do that withut covert actions, that are increasingly hard after making the idea public?

It would be monumentally stupid to actually do that.

Seems like a well crafted false flag PR stunt to me.

That's it and that's all.

It's all heresay:::

First it was the Russians who did it.
Then late yesterday & early today Putin actually was in the "Watergate" doing it.
Tomorrow, after rush hour in the East they'll lay Trump's name in there, let it marinate thru the weekend.
They're trying to get to those Electors. Supposedly they have 20 Repugs Electors on the wire. Pelosi's kid has 50 Democrat Electors in her pocket + that Texas Repug.

They'll need those 20 + 17 more Repugs Electors to roll over to Hillary.