Here are two of political history’s great constants: first, countries meddling in the internal affairs of others (both enemies and “friends”); and, second, bogus charges from a faction in one country that foreigners are meddling in its internal affairs to help another faction.
Both are poison for any country that wishes to rule itself.
So if we’re serious about being a self-governing republic, we have to demand that President Obama declassify as much intelligence as possible that Russia may have intervened in the 2016 presidential election.
Taking Donald Trump’s position — that we should just ignore the question of Russian hacking and “move on” — would be a disaster.
Relying on a hazy war of leaks from the CIA, FBI, various politicians, and their staff is an equally terrible idea.
A congressional investigation would be somewhat better, but that would take years — like the investigations of the intelligence on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction — and would be fatally compromised by the Democrats’ political timidity and GOP opposition.
The only path forward that makes sense is for Obama to order the release of as much evidence as possible underlying the reported “high confidence” of U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia both intervened in the election and did so with the intention of aiding Trump’s candidacy.
Intelligence agencies hate, often with good reason, to publicly reveal how they obtain information, or even the information itself, since that can make it clear how they got it. But the government would not need to reveal its most sensitive sources and methods — e.g., which specific Vladimir Putin aides we have on our payroll — to release enough evidence to aid the public debate over interference in our election by a powerful nation state.
And if there were ever a situation in which it was crucial to lean in the direction of more rather than less disclosure, it’s now. Obama should make that clear to the intelligence agencies, and that if forced to he is willing to wield his power as president to declassify anything he deems appropriate.
The current discourse on this issue is plagued by partisan gibberish — there is a disturbing trend emerging that dictates that if you don’t believe Russia hacked the election or if you simply demand evidence for this tremendously significant allegation, you must be a Trump apologist or a Soviet agent.
The reality, however, is that Trump’s reference to the Iraq War and the debacle over weapons of mass destruction is both utterly cynical and a perfectly valid point. U.S. intelligence agencies have repeatedly demonstrated that they regularly both lie and get things horribly wrong. In this case they may well be correct, but they cannot expect Americans to simply take their word for it.
It’s also the case that the U.S. has a long history of interfering in other countries’ elections, and far worse: The U.S. has overthrown democratically elected governments the world over. In fact, in 2006 Hillary Clinton herself criticized the George W. Bush administration for not doing “something to determine who was going to win” in Palestinian elections. It would not be shocking in the least if Russia sought to interfere in the U.S. electoral process.
But let’s have some proof.
In his Farewell Address of 1796, George Washington wrote, “Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it.” That was good advice then, and it’s good advice now. We have to force our politicians to take it seriously.
And if it comes to pass that the U.S. government refuses to back up these serious claims with evidence, then perhaps a patriotic whistleblower will do the public an important service. Here is our offer at The Intercept: If anyone has solid proof that Russia interfered with U.S. elections, send it to us via SecureDrop and we will verify its legitimacy and publish it.
This looks like solid reporting from solid authors. It’s not. Where the mention of Craig Murray? For those who don’t know, because they don’t ‘read around’, a dangerous oversight it seems, Craig Murray (a progressive), the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan who became a whistleblower, met with the ‘leaker’ (no need to speculate on this) and passed his (or…) info on to Wikileaks. The Intercept has a great deal of prestige owing to it’s stable of stellar Leftwing journos, but it’s compromised and was compromised from day one. Pierre Omidyar is an important, influential and ‘powerful’ establishment player, as a bit of research (active, as opposed to passive) will reveal. Start with the Pando back and forth between Gleen Greenwald who claims that he and his colleagues have full editorial indendence while Jeremy Scahill undercuts Glen’s contention by bragging about Pierre’s great interest in, and hands on involvement in, his staff’s work. Omidyar, a White House regular (according to Pando writers Mark Ames and Paul Bradley Carr) has been involved in shenanigans in the Ukraine (and who knows what else.)
Then there’s Murtaza Hussain’s pro White Helmets and pro USAID article. That’s when I lost all my respect for The Intercept. My respect for individual journos there continues to slide with pieces like the above that omit the crucial Craig Murray connection.
The military industrial complex cannot declassify the source of hacked information, because as most of us know there was not a “Russian” hack in the case of the DNC. The information was leaked to Wikileaks, not hacked by Russia. The “Russian Hack” is a diversional tactic that is being deployed as subterfuge in an attempt to scuttle the trail of palpable corruption left behind by corporatists in power and their cronies in the media.
Obama cares not about US citizens, he is trying to put a spin on a failed, neocon/neolib presidency.
First Black Prez fell in love with Wall St white privilege. He talked about it occasionally, like when he declared himself a moderate REPUB, but mostly he just hung out with the most greedy capitalists in the world, and approved billions in weapons sales.
Obummer will not release anything, because he is a tool of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is not about truth, it is about pure aggression, always looking for an advantage by destruction.
Mr. Scahill, you don’t need the CIA or the FBI to determine whether or not the Russians were responsible for the e-mail hacks of Hillary Clinton, John Podesta or the DNC. All we need is for Richard Burr the chair of, the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to subpoena
ADM. Michael Rogers head of the NSA. President Obama can declassify any intelligence reports that are needed and he can order the Admiral to answer all questions truthfully. As we all know the NSA has been scooping up all e-mails and phone calls originating inside and outside of the United states for at least a decade. Admiral Rogers should be able to tell the Intelligence committee the day, the time, when and where the e-mails were hacked, who did it, and where the e-mails were sent to. If the NSA doesn’t have this information, you can be sure that the e-mails weren’t hacked , but were leaked by people inside of the Clinton campaign and inside the DNC!
United State. and all his Political system. They Are all Fake. Very sad and shocking.
*
*#ARRESTOBAMA
*
He can NOT because HE has NONE.
OBAMA has been accustomed to lying publicly with his dirty wars without having to do a judicial demonstration of NOTHING, and believed that he could do it now without consequences.
OBAMA has been comfortable with his lies used through the falsification of military judicial evidences. OBAMA is a CIA man, the most important CIA man of all time, the man who has used the CIA for the maintenance of military terrorism activities branded as false flag activities, in such a way that could justify a series of determinations taking against Russia.
OBAMA has lied during his two administrations with matters of such seriousness that yes, he deserves an indictment in the International Criminal Court of the United Nations. Matters that of course I will not post here.
But just to graph the gravity of the hole in which OBAMA is involved by its illegalities, can tell you that the United Nations international criminal court, ICC-UN, already has a case on Lybia in which neither OBAMA, Cameron, Jens Stoltenbeg, or any of the NATO nations they bombed Lybia are included.
*
OBAMA is the dirtiest anticommunist the United States has ever had in its history, an authentic Manchurian candidate. Perhaps worse than MacCharty himself because OBAMA has tried to legalize Pentagon Nazi projects and integrate the implanted microchips controlled by the ECHELON satellite network. (OBAMAcare)
*
The dirty war of OBAMA has consisted of illegal activities that afterwards it has tried to cover with a gigantic mantle of public lie, for the same reason as investigative journalist I have dedicated to make delivery of all the subjects that I denounce to the INTERPOL and now with copy to The UN Criminal Court.
Yes, OBAMA is a pathological LIAR and the CIA makes the lie an art of military engineering.
Obama needed all these lies and his Russophobia to try to leave well out off the white House when he lost the elections, he lost the war and now he has lost the military prestige.
Regards Jeremy, you are still my hero.
Alejandra H. Covarrubias
investigative journalist
Specialist in the Pentagon’s International Nazi Projects.
(still Silenced by NATO nations Norway and US)
Member of the Union of Journalists of Norway.
*
He can NOT because HE has NONE.
OBAMA has been accustomed to lying publicly with his filthy wars without having to do a judicial demonstration of NOTHING, and believed that he could do it now without consequences. OBAMA has been comfortable with his lies used through the falsification of military judicial evidences. OBAMA is a CIA man, the most important CIA man of all time, the man who has used the CIA for the maintenance of military terrorism activities branded as false flag activities, in such a way that could justify a series of determinations taking against Russia.
OBAMA has lied during his two administrations with matters of such seriousness that yes, he deserves an indictment in the International Criminal Court of the United Nations. Matters that of course I will not post here.
But just to graph the gravity of the hole in which OBAMA is involved by its illegalities, can tell you that the United Nations international criminal court, ICC-UN, already has a case on Lybia in which neither OBAMA, Cameron, Jens Stoltenbeg, or any of the NATO nations they bombed Lybia are included.
*
OBAMA is the dirtiest anticommunist the United States has ever had in its history, an authentic Manchurian candidate. Perhaps worse than MacCharty himself because OBAMA has tried to legalize Pentagon Nazi projects and integrate the implanted microchips controlled by the ECHELON satellite network. (OBAMAcare)
*
The dirty war of OBAMA has consisted of illegal activities that afterwards it has tried to cover with a gigantic mantle of public lie, for the same reason as investigative journalist I have dedicated to make delivery of all the subjects that I denounce to the INTERPOL and now with copy to The UN Criminal Court.
Yes, OBAMA is a pathological LIAR and the CIA makes the lie an art of military engineering.
Obama needed all these lies and his Russophobia to try to leave well out off the white House when he lost the elections, he lost the war and now he has lost the military prestige.
Regards Jeremy, you are still my hero.
Alejandra H. Covarrubias
investigative journalist
Specialist in the Pentagon’s International Nazi Projects.
(still Silenced by NATO nations Norway and US)
Member of the Union of Journalists of Norway
Or we could just see this for the global warming scam it is. Same thing you see. Put bogus information program out via stated owned media: Fox, MSNBC, CBS et al. and repeated ad infinitum.
What does it mean to say the Russia “interfered with U.S. elections”?
Did they raid and office (as Nixon did)? Did they interfere with with the ability of voters to vote? Did they falsify vote counts? Of course not.
They published accurate DNC emails proving that:
* The DNC actively subverted Bernie’s campaign.
* The DNC plotted to disrupt pro-Trump rallies.
* The DNC and the press plotted to dictate the coverage of both campaigns, plant “fake news”, and rig the debates by vetting questions with Hillary.
We should be thanking the Russians (if it was them) for bringing DNC corruption to light.
A nicely balanced and well reasoned article, pointing up how foolish the outgoing President Obama looks by rattling sabres toward Russia without bothering to present the evidence against Russia publicly. Clearly, for almost his entire presidency Obama has been in the thrall of the national security establishment, and that same establishment feels threatened by the prospect of the incoming President Trump, probably justifiably. Therefore, while it is quite plausible that Russia might interfere in US elections, it is at least equally, and possibly more plausible that the national security establishment opposing him would literally stop at nothing to de-legitimize his presidency before it starts.
Jeremy is right of course. Most governments play thegame of spying on each other while denouncing others who do the same. He’s also right that we have no right to expect that our many intelligence agencies, 17 by some counts, will ever tell us the truth. They lie routinely about everything, from their budget requirements to the assassinations of foreign leaders, to the intrusion into the internal affairs of ALL nations. Their stock in trade is deceit and lying. If we want ‘truth’, listen to people like Jeremy Scahill, who put it on the line daily to get it to us. I have few heroes, but Scahill tops the list.
It is not spying when we do it… it is merely due diligence in anticipation of making the world a partner in the American dream.
Curious if y’all have ever asked for Putin to declassify secret info re: his claims on Ukraine etc.
Let me anticipate responding to your answer: I didn’t think so
What’s to document that’s not already known? Ukraine was a deeply divided country with a pro-western, anti-Russian western half and a pro-Russian eastern half. After the Orange Revolution sent the legitimately elected pro-Russian Ukrainian president Yanukovich packing, it was inevitable that the country would divide somewhere along the lines that it has. Other than helping the pro-Russian eastern Ukrainians, Putin didn’t have much to do with what happened. On the other hand, the US and its NATO allies, by sticking to the pretense that the Orange Revolutionaries that took over in Kiev spoke for the entire country, had everything to do with it.
“the cia said … ”
last refuge of scoundrels
Astounding that Obama is accusing Putin of hacking, selling oil and weapons when he got caught lying about NSA spying on 35 leaders, he not only knew, he gave permission, AND he is the biggest weapon and oil salesman in the world. 115 billion sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia to annihilate Yemen, one of poorest black countries in Africa, and the Guardian just reported on Obama’s dirty oil deals around the world.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/01/obama-fossil-fuels-us-export-import-bank-energy-projects
Yes, Obama doesn’t seem to understand that his actions continue to erode what little credibility the US government & its agencies have around the world.
It is now only the really stupid or deluded that believe their propaganda. Others appearing to believe it are usually paying lip service to their political or economic masters (i.e the USA has some hold over them).
The rest of us, however, know that, unless there is solid evidence, the claims or accusations are likely to be false. With a colluding mainstream media, the US government can manufacture ‘false news’ to convince large enough numbers of the stupid, deluded or lip service payers and therefore get away with whatever action / retribution they like. The invasion of Iraq showed us how it works.
It also helps explain why more and more thinking people appear to be sympathising with the Russians. I say ‘appear’ because it sometimes it is true and other times isn’t. My view is that while the Russians are guilty of many things, the USA (& its tame allies) is too. Neither side is better than the other. They are both as ‘good’ and as ‘bad’ as each other.
Ninety percent of black Americans approve of Obama’s policies. Are you saying that 9 out of 10 black Americans are profoundly ignorant?
9 of ten blacks in the South chose Hillary in the Southern primaries.
Don’t blame that on anything except failed black leadership.
It was so easy to get on the Hillary Gravy Train (choo-choo).
alnost certainly this comes from intercepted signals and usa [nsa] directed hacking.
it is a constant that such sources are not formally revealed/exposed, tho it is expected by the targets.
I don’t trust the C.I.A. I want to see how they know these things. I promise not to tell anyone else.
POTUS won’t do anything that makes a presidential decision look partisan. He asked McConnell before the election in September to disclose the Russian hacking in a bi-partisan way and McConnell refused, Obama then sat on the info because he didn’t want it to look partisan. He has made his way through life being a non-threatening Black man whom whites could get along with. He hasn’t changed as President. What he failed to see was that he had to exercise power not try to share it. Now Dems have lost all power in the White House, the Congress, the SCOTUS and in the State legislatures and Governorships. That’s his legacy.
Yet he addresses the crowds with such finesse and aplomb and sleeps well at night,,, such is the makeup of politicians. You’re right , that’s one lousy legacy.
Curiously, the Democratic Party shill, Daily Kos, is circulating a petition making the same request and that the results should be made available to the Electoral College before they vote for Trump on Monday.
The CIA is the last agency that anyone could or should trust with telling the truth when it comes to US foreign policy. In this instance, it has produced not a shred of evidence to back the allegations that the Russians hacked the emails of the Democratic National Committee .
What is not arguable is what those emails revealed, that the DNC under Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz was deliberately sabotaging the efforts of Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries which resulted in her and four of her staff members being forced to resign.
What they were doing, in other words, was interfering in the US presidential elections on the behalf of the party’s anointed favorite, Hillary Clinton. Rather than distancing herself from Wasserman Shultz’s
actions, Clinton made her the honorary chair of her campaign! And yet her supporters and Scahill and Schwarz are complaining not about that unconscionable breach of should be the norms of our Democratic election process but legitimizing the finger pointing at the Russians who, without a shred of evidence presented to the public,are supposed to have passed the emails on to Wikileaks
What this petition and this entire campaign initiated by those in Washington seeking a confrontation with Russia is telling us is that they would have preferred the public not to have been informed of the Democratic party’s shenanigans. That it would have been better if the public had not been informed of the
content of Clinton’s speeches to Goldman Sachs contained in John Podesta’s emails that exposed the duplicity she had tried to hide despite the demands of Sanders and the media for her to make them
public. Would it have been better had those speeches of hers remained a secret?
Why this is not a part of this article I find disappointing at best.
How about tit for tat–I’m sure the American public had every right to disseminate private information hacked by Russian intelligence coming out of the RNC, Steve Bannon and Kellyann Conway’s
private emails too — and before the 2016 presidential elections of
course. The thing that is of importance sir, is that a foreign power has put its big fat fingers into America’s democratic elections in order to have an individual as our president elect who agrees with them on oil, NATO, Ukraine and Crimea. It’s Russia’s MO to hack other countries precisely to alter their elections and one third of the US Republican Party hold Putin in high esteem. Shame on you all.
The missing point here is, while Wasserman and the DNC did tamper with a Democratic Party preliminary, they are a domestic entity working to undermine their own organization towards the ends of domestic political influence; where as Putin and the Russians are a foreign nation, traditionally at odds with our policies and government, tampering with our national election towards the ends of power and the destabilization of our country.
These two offenses are not anywhere near equal in weight or result.
What “foreign power has put its big fat fingers into America’s democratic elections in order to have an individual as our president elect who agrees with them on oil, NATO, Ukraine and Crimea.”? Can you support your claims? Probably not… best to limit your attacks when your knowledge is blank.
What exactly, gives you the impression that either Scahill or Schwartz kowtow to the Democratic party in any way? Just a cursory scan of their articles will reveal that they have no favorites when it comes to political parties and are only interested in the truth and its dissemination. In my opinion, you presume way too much about Scahill and Schwartz’s motives and lumping them with “Hillary’s supporters” is without any basis in fact.
Hi,
People that cannot read this article without some sympathy …. I wonder if they deserve a seat at the table?
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/15/making-russia-the-enemy/
The picture:Obomba saying to himself,I can dunk on this guy,for sure.
Bama’s Bulldookie Schemes
ecommcon
Obama must declassify evidence of Chinese influence-peddling in the DNC
Yes, U.S. Rep. Judy Chu’s support of Hillary was/is clearly UN-Ameican
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-democratic-convention-2016-live-this-southern-california-congresswoman-1469651675-htmlstory.html
“So if we’re serious about being a self-governing republic, we have to demand that President Obama declassify as much intelligence as possible that Russia may have intervened in the 2016 presidential election.”
My, oh my, oh my… MacCarthyism at work, live on the Intercept. Who would’ve believed it?
And why not ask him, politely, to declassify as much intelligence as possible that ANY foreign power may have intervened in that process? As in: we’re not so fully biased that we should ever name the possible culprit and beneficiary before any investigation has had a chance to start, because we obviously don’t want to influence said investigation or its outcome, y’know.
On the one hand there’s hard solid proof that Clinton’s campaign was heavily subsidized by Qatar and Saudi Arabia, to name but a few foreign powers. More than proof… leaks which haven’t been denounced as false. On the other there’s a rumor, launched by a mix of sore losers and sociopathic liars, that whoever leaked the Podesta e-mails MAY have second-degree ties to someone working for the Russian government. As in : as flimsy as it gets.
And even if those rumors had some truth in them, it doesn’t really matter who helped spill the beans about Clinton’s forked tongue. Americans either wanted to vote Trump in the first place, or gave up on Clinton after learning who she really is. Let me remind you there’s been no denial concerning the authenticity of the leaked material.
So, assuming some voters were actually influenced by what may only be described as the truth, until proven otherwise, and that tipped the scales in favor of Trump, shouldn’t it be considered an insult to the American people to belittle their common sense while focusing, as this article does, on who may have been responsible for letting the truth out in the first place?
If you’re gonna act as propaganda tools, try being not so blatantly obvious. By definition your readership ain’t made of rednecks who’d gob any BS without critical thinking. Please, try showing more respect.
Lost in translation: read “swallow” instead of “gob” (gobe/gober means “to swallow” in French). Oops.
Yeah,the whole Israeli MSM was pro Hell bitch,and tried to fix the election for her,but were thwarted by the American people,thank you America.
Any expose on their leviathan stranglehold on our info?
A world of BS.
And if there were ever a situation in which it was crucial to lean in the direction of more rather than less disclosure, it’s now. Obama should make that clear to the intelligence agencies, and that if forced to he is willing to wield his power as president to declassify anything he deems appropriate.
I’m not a Soviet agent, but I honestly think (or know) that bo is just a pitiful coward who the war criminal agency that is the nsa decided some being who created the universe wanted them to puppet him like the spineless coward that he is.
If you are saying 0 was totally malleable to the warmongers whims,with very few exceptions(Iran),I agree.
The most disappointing POTUS in US history,as his message of change was chump.His reelection was handed to him by Romney,and his 47% remark,very similar to HRCs deplorable gaffe,which illustrates the duopoly angle.
Yes, Jeremy and Jon’s argument makes sense, but I worry that the intelligence agencies would cherry-pick the evidence they release to support their conclusions. It could amount to the CIA investigating itself. Unless they reveal incontrovertible evidence of orders to hack the U.S. election coming down from high officials in the Russian government, there will be no resolution–just continued innuendos until the public loses interest.
Here’s a point of view –
“Believing something the CIA says is like trusting a meth addict with your car, and trusting the CIA when they’re working with the Washington Post is like trusting a meth addict with your car and leaving your kid in the back seat with the house keys and money for Taco Bell. There is now no reason for the American people not to demand conclusive evidence for this thing they’re being asked to swallow, and no reason not to dismiss these allegations as one more act of CIA psy-ops if that proof fails to come through.
Quit clowning around, CIA. This is the most powerful political office on earth we’re talking about here, not one of your dorky little tinhorn state operations. Clinton insiders are already hinting at a push for an electoral coup, and Democratic party loyalists are soiling themselves with excitement. Start treating this thing with the seriousness it deserves or stop pretending your words have relevance to civilians.”
from http://www.newslogue.com/debate/190
Neon Trotsky.oy.
That’s one Hell of an offer Dudes… Someone sends you free content, you publish it at great profit and- wait for it:
You get the goldmine / They get the SHAFT.
That’s real Woodward/Bernstein in 2016!
You’ll wanna get together and ‘polish’ your pulitzers tonight winners.
Worse than mere poisoning are slow acting poisons like asbestos or lead.
Why are these poisons worse than a more accelerated poison — say, polonium poisoning?
Because some poisons do damage for years, even decades, before the phenomenon — the poisoning — is finally acknowledge. Consider now known poisons like asbestos, DDT, lead, dioxins, CFC, fracking waste water … the list of poisons is probably longer than our average lifespans.
Yet we live in a world in which we poison ourselves for the sake of convenience and institutional profit. (Ever wonder why the kooky but reliably anti-war Ron Paul kept getting elected in South Texas? Ask Dow.)
Let me offer this observation. The fact of something — the phenomenon — and the explanation for that phenomenon differ.
More dangerous than the phenomenon itself (the poison) is the lack of explanation for associated phenomena. When residents of Flint, Michigan complained about the appearance and taste of their lead filled water, state officials from the governor on down. reassured the residents that their water was safe for drinking, cooking and bathing. It took 18 months for the governor to publicly acknowledge that much of Flint’s tap water was poison. Sure, lead may be the cause of lead poison, but actually the poison was delivered through an undemocratic political system.
I think the election of Donald Trump as US president is, itself, a poisoning — something which doesn’t pass the smell test, the appearance test or the taste test.
Yet, like the residents of Flint, we’re told to get over it.
So I think the thrust of this article is well intended (the facts, nothing but the facts), but lacking. Even if the professionals (at CIA) say this or that, “establishment” evidence will be discounted, dismissed, and denied to maintan the political system responsible for the poisoning.
Many of those commenting here say that in various ways. (But here’s hint for most: Trump is not the antidote.)
The question of whether Russia’s intervened in the US election is similar to a climate change argument; yes, we know too much carbon dioxide is poisoning the earth, but is it because of mankind or because of sunspots, bad science, or earth’s declination?
Of course Russia intervened in the US election. That shouldn’t be in dispute if one looks at the history of the KGB, Russian expansion, European elections, history and testimony by the Russians themselves.
The real question is whether Russian intervention changed the outcome.
In short, is it Russia’s poison or poison injected by domestic interests?
Since neither of these are going to acknowledge their own involvement (or collusion), no matter what evidence the CIA could offer, it will not be sufficient.
Thus we should be asking questions we can determine for ourselves — as an analogy, why rely upon oil companies to tell the truth about climate change?
1. Why were the pre-election polls consistently inaccurate?
2. What would Russia have to gain from a Trump presidency?
3. How does the winner of the electoral vote lose the popular vote?
4, Why should we assume vote totals delivered to State officials are more inviolate than say scientific facts delivered to State officials?
5. Would we have a more temperamentally and intellectually qualifies President elect if we’d selected almost any American citizen at random? (Or rather, why is it I can credibly ask this question.)
6. Here’s my favorite question, one I’ve been asking for almost a year (since last February), why did Republicans announce immediately after Scalia’s death (within hours) that they would not vote on any possible successor to Scalia? I find that very, very odd. Yet again, politicians of both parties refuse to address this question — (yes Democrats fulminate and some Republican hint they would vote, but mostly, no one pays it the attention it deserves.)
In short: if you don’t ask the right questions — scientifically, politically, historically or just as a matter of pure curiosity — how do you expect to discover accurate information or offer compelling explanations for this Trump as president phenomenon (this November poisoning)?
He also believes the (alleged) CIA Russia analysis must be declassified.
https://twitter.com/i/moments/809033129918951424
https://wh.gov/itg5Q
_”Swedish riots rage for fourth night”_
“Police attacked and cars torched in Stockholm suburbs as unrest sparked by long-term youth unemployment and poverty spreads”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/23/swedish-riots-stockholm
The dark underbelly of the progressive left has always included globalism. A public awakened to that embarrasses the progressive left no end.
I realize this troll above is hopeless and should be ignored, but for anyone else interested: There’s an interview Chomsky did in 1993 about NAFTA which was incredibly prophetic. You can easily find it in Youtube.
Leftists should listen to their own advice then. But progressives hate Perot, and hate Trump, for being opposed to NAFTA and opposed to TPP and TTIP and TISA.
And they embrace immigration reform, gun control, public schools, Climate Change, mandated health insurance, Equality, trans Hillary for supporting free unrestricted, domestic unemployment exacerbating trade.
The right has supported free trade – so it’s fairly difficult to blame the progressive left for “globalism” (globalization). As a right winger, I support free trade which has helped lift hundreds of millions out of poverty world-wide. At the same time, this has expanded the reach of American businesses. Cheaper products also increase our standard of living. Over all, globalism has far more benefits than than negatives – and there ain’t no going back now. Sorry.
Thanks.
You’re a Rockefeller Republican neocon, craig. That’s not right wing.
LOL
I’ll go with neocon, but your defense of far right opposition to globalization leaves much to be desired. Would you like to try that again?
And if you don’t mind. I am going to give you some advice. Saying JYT is out of bounds at the Intercept. You will be labeled an anti-semite. Try being more subtle like Jews run US foreign policy, or Jews run the Republican Party in the interests of Israel. That’s acceptable language at the Intercept. You might even get an invitation to the new “one viewpoint” site.
You can thank me later…….
The Jew York Times is an accurate moniker for a corrupt serial lying publication,whose only reason for being for 70 years is Israeli hegemony.
Hopefully Trump will sic the FCC on this obvious fifth column traitor publication,which seems to get even worse under the son who just took over the publisher position.
Doubling down on stupid.
Whom the gods destroy,they first make mad.
Should they be known as Mennonites Today,instead ,craigie waigie?
“Try being more subtle like Jews run US foreign policy, or Jews run the Republican Party in the interests of Israel.”
Indeed one must be subtle when discussing Israel or charges of will fly.
Look at how subtle Daniel Pipes is:
The President of The Middle East Forum, an architect of the Iraq war, thinks Tillerson has “complete lack of knowledge about the intricacies of American foreign policy”.
See how subtle that dog whistle is? Tillerson is not a champion of Israel Foreign P, er, I mean American Foreign Policy … so be warned!
I read an article out of the Jerusalem Post which indicated that Tillerson was the worst choice for Israel of the four being considered. It’s not that he was known to be anti-Israel, but there was no resume on what he supports and does not support. He’s an unknown whereas the other three were known to be strong supporters of Israel.
However, he could turn out to be a strong supporter of Israel. We’ll see.
Lol evidence
https://www.f-secure.com/documents/996508/1030745/dukes_whitepaper.pdf
Replace the words Syria and Russia with Saudi-Arabia and USA , and Samantha Power is totally right about what is happening in Yemen.
Samantha Power… talking about shame… the mind truly boggles!
http://uk.businessinsider.com/samantha-power-russia-assad-aleppo-2016-12?r=US&IR=T
You have a problem with rescuing Syria from an until recently stable, thriving civilization under al-Assad, by an immigration reform promoting, health care insurance mandating, gun control pushing, Equality squealing, population control planning, progressive left U.S. administration, Gert?
“The ‘Washington Post’ ‘Blacklist’ Story Is Shameful and Disgusting”
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/washington-post-blacklist-story-is-shameful-disgusting-w452543 (Matt Taibbi – Rolling Stone)
Well worth a gander, IMO…
“Forensic evidence analyzed by several cybersecurity firms, CrowdStrike, Fidelis, and Mandiant (or FireEye), strongly indicates that two Russian intelligence agencies infiltrated the DNC computer systems. The American cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which removed the hacking programs, revealed a history of encounters with both groups and had already named them, calling one of them Cozy Bear and the other Fancy Bear, names which are used in the media.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee_cyber_attacks
FBI: What evidence was that Adrian?
CHRISTIAN: Our electronic redaction tools are at the ready and we’ll make sure to include all the REQUIRED redaction notations…
“What Comes After Aleppo Falls?” -The New York Times
“Aleppo has fallen.” -The Takeaway, WNYC (with NYT,) NPR
(They’re both talking about the Syria retaking its own city with the assistance of its own government’s leader, al-Assad. What kind of warped perspective is the corporate progressive left pushing?)
Listen Mr ‘Adolf Hitler was a progressive’, there’s no such thing as “the corporate progressive left”. The people you’re referring to are Neoliberal shills, with a very thin and transparent faux-progressive veneer.
You’re a idjut.
Gert tries to convince her audience that the New York Times and NPR aren’t corporate progressive left.
NYT and NPR are “socially progressive”… that is, they pander to the feel-goodery of the currently popular radically inclusive social justice narrative. But, they don’t really give a shit about that. It’s just veneer.
They are, however, on matters of foreign policy, entirely in the pocket of the empire. And, on economics, shameless apologists and promoters of the Neoliberal agenda, which is to elevate the rich at the expense of the poor. This is as right wing as you can get. It works, too. Millions of people who really wanted Bernie Sanders as President (an actual progressive leftist) ended up settling for Hillary Clinton who is only able to sell herself as left because she panders to women, racial minorities (recently), and (more recently) LGBTQ’s. She wouldn’t actually *do* anything for them, or not much, anyhow. There’s much more personal gain to be made in the expansion of empire. In the US, there is no “left”. We have an economically right wing identity politics party and an economically right traditionalist nationalist party. If you aren’t a hundred-millionaire, fuck you.
Yes, rainfade, John Hockenberry, and Nina Totenberg, and Audie Cornish, and Robert Siegel, are actually right wing on economics and foreign policy. And the immigration control and gun control and health care insurance mandate and transgender and Climate Change New York Times is actually right wing on economics and foreign policy.
What a bunch of baloney. Their foreign policy and economics perspectives are as limousine liberal as the left’s historic record: Smashing down borders, government should provide it all, world government is the answer, nations are passe,….
Bernie Sanders, in your own words, “an actual progressive leftist,” squarely endorsed Hillary Clinton. Which proves that she too is a progressive leftist.
And which also proves that her other endorsers the NYT, and sympathizers Comcast, Viacom, Time-Warner, Disney, and Salon, and Verizon, and Yahoo; and Hollywood; are also progressive left.
Yeah, and their hard core progressive leftism is just “pandering” because their proven progressive leftism includes globalism (the public’s realization of which embarrasses you and the rest of the left as always).
You’re pathetic.
That’s right. It’s pretty easy to say “I’m all for gay rights.” Let’s see what they have to say about $15/hour, single-payer or imperialism — policies that would actually affect business interests. That’s where you really know what people are all about.
Jose, are you attempting to say that progressive leftists’ infatuation with globalism, and with erasure of borders, and with world government, isn’t imperialist?
And that progressive attempts to artificially force compensation in order to try to live as few people–i.e., its elite–under socialism ever have (see USSR, se DPRK, see Venezuala) without rioting in streets (see Brixton, see Paris, see Stockholm) is a rational argument?
Whatever they are now,(a bunch of criminals)they sprang from the head of Trotsky,a leftist commie Jew,who was actually just a command and control hypocrite,just like his descendants.
Hezbollah executed cats which lived in Montana.(After Aleppo falls)The mountain lion chased a cat up a power pole and both were electrocuted in Bozeman,Montana,but the propagandists said it was Hezbollah cat hatred in Syria.
Beyond beyond.
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) dispute Russia Hacking Claims…….
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/
Great interview…..by Scott Horton
Craig Murray: DNC, Podesta emails leaked by Americans, not hacked by Russia
https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/scotthortonshow/121316-craig-murray-dnc-podesta-emails-leaked-americans-not-hacked-russia/
Seeping back into McCarthyism I see…. Now if only we could figure out how the Russians tricked Donna Brazile into giving Hillary debate questions.
Looks like the Democrats are coming up short on their theory that “Russia/Putin” hacked the DNC and Podesta:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4027344/Top-U-S-spy-agency-not-embraced-CIA-assessment-Russia-hacking-sources.html
Now if only we could figure out how the Russians forced Donna Brazile into giving Hillary debate questions…
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/370144-mcfaul-journalists-foreign-agents-russian/
Former US ambassador to Russia turned full-time Kremlin critic Michael McFaul offered to present a show on RT for free to prove that dissenting views are not welcome on the channel. He was immediately given a chance to record a pilot program.
“I volunteered to host my own show on RT. No response yet,” McFaul, who was in Moscow between 2012 and 2014, wrote on his Twitter feed on Tuesday.
Within an hour, RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan tweeted back: “Let’s do it! I am waiting for the pilot.”
“Have your US team be in touch by email,” replied McFaul, who is now back at Stanford University, as a professor specializing in post-Communist Russia.
As stakes grew in this game of chicken, one user asked if McFaul was going to take money from the Russian state, to which he replied that he would “work for free.”
When asked about his qualifications for a job in front of the camera, McFaul promised to submit a resume.
“Professor… with respect… is this a good idea?” asked a concerned McFaul subscriber.
“I’m calling their bluff. They will never air a show hosted by me. I would focus every show on Putin,” replied the 53-year-old.
“Waiting for that pilot,” shot back Simonyan.
————————————
Mcfaul has been a keen supporter of investigating Russia’s influence in swinging the result of last month’s presidential election won by Donald Trump. In his latest column for the Washington Post last week, he particularly laid into foreign-language news outlets broadcasting from Moscow.
“We have laws preventing foreign governments from contributing financial support to candidates. Should we have similar laws about in-kind support? Such regulation seems hard, in tension with our First Amendment, but shouldn’t our lawmakers wrestle with the issue? Should Sputnik and RT employees be accredited as journalists or as foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act? I don’t know. But we need to know,” wrote the former ambassador.
At the same time, McFaul appears to have a grudging respect for RT’s power, if not its content.
“RT does serve the interests of the Kremlin effectively. [The US government] must reconsider our strategy in this domain. VOA [Voice of America] not cutting it,” he tweeted following his exchange with Simonyan.
McFaul’s tenure coincided with one of the worst periods in Russia-US relations since Perestroika, with his final months marked by tension over the Maidan protests in Kiev, and the international reaction to the Sochi Olympics, after which he left.
I recall Obama making fun of Mitt Romney when he said that Russia was our #1 geopolitical foe in 2012. Now, our covert “Reich wing” policy isn’t happy with Russia, I guess.
The cold war is over but now we have regime change in Syria.What was Romney talking about then, I wonder.
Saudi Arabia and Nato weren’t happy with Russia for getting involved and then a Russian plane went down. What are they warning Trump about and what will they do in order to get public pressure on him to change his tone about Russia?
If what we’re doing was honorable in the Middle East, we wouldn’t have to be so secretive about it. They wouldn’t have to lie and create incidents to get support to do it.
The state-operated New York Times is reporting today that what crowdstrike found on the DNC computer did indeed link to the Russian government (Following the Links From Russian Hackers to the U.S. Election http://nyti.ms/2a0zep8}:
“……..The Central Intelligence Agency concluded that the Russian government deployed computer hackers to help elect Donald J. Trump…….”
July 2015
Federal Security Service
“……..A hacking group possibly linked to the agency, the main successor to the K.G.B., entered Democratic National Committee servers undetected for nearly a year, security researchers said. The group was nicknamed Cozy Bear, the Dukes or A.P.T. 29 for “advanced persistent threat.”……” – reported by NYT
March 2016
G.R.U.: Military Intelligence
“………Investigators believe that the G.R.U., or a hacking group known as Fancy Bear or A.P.T. 28, was the second group to break into the D.N.C., but it has played a bigger role in releasing the committee’s emails…..”.- reported by NYT
WikiLeaks
“…….The website released about 50,000 emails from the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers. It is unclear how WikiLeaks obtained the emails. But Russian intelligence agencies are prime suspects, researchers said…..” reported by NYT
In my honest (and neutral) opinion, there is little doubt that the Russian intelligence services worked with Assange to release the information (probably through a third party). The political motivation for Assange makes this accusation reasonable considering his anti-American view point. He almost certainly knew the emails came from Russian intelligence services. Assange is a really a scumbag (in my neutral opinion).
As a neutral observer I have my doubts about Podesta’s own integrity. Leaving all this proof of cheating by the DNC open on the internet…….a true double agent couldn’t have done that better.
This guy has the right of it…
http://www.alternet.org/comments/election-2016/why-medias-emphasis-russian-hacking-distracts-value-leaks-exposed-corruption#disqus_thread
Excellente article! If indeed it was the Russians, no one should be shocked. However, to me it didn’t change the outcome of this election. All it did was expose how corrupt and deviant the DNC Establishment are, especially for what they did to Bernie Sanders. However, the laughable part (which isn’t really laughable) but you know what I mean is how our establishment in DC are sooo shocked and disturbed about this and act as though they have never done such dastardly deeds like this to other countries. This is what is laughable. Just look at what we did in Russia in 2012 by using NGOs to stir up violent protests in hoping to destabilize Russia. Then, when the former President of Ukraine in 2013 decided to go with an economic package with Russia instead of the EU/West, the CIA in conjunction with the State Department (Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt) covertly worked with the opposition groups tied to neo-nazis to violently overthrow the democratically elected President.
Indeed. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Of course, all this assumes that Russia did it, and not a lone leaker.
Obama, by not disclosing any evidence about Russia doing anything, thank you for indirectly admitting you don’t have any.
It is a bit damning, isn’t it.
Trevor Timm:
https://twitter.com/trevortimm/status/808034660731142144
Ha! Exquisite timing.
It will be fun to read the details but it has long been widely known — and obvious — that the “victorious” American Owners and their Western junior partners loved the hell out of the tractable drunk, Yeltsin, and his willingness to go along with the dismantling of the infrastructure of the former Soviet state and to be guided by his wise friends in Washington.
Putin is hated, despised and demonized precisely because he rejected the role of Western stooge and puppet.
Putin should be hated because he runs a repressive regime under the guise of democracy that quashes any sign of political opposition. Though of course, America is in the same boat. But let’s not imply that Putin is hated solely because he doesn’t suit our interests. That may be the media’s motivation for why they focus on him and not a government like, say, Turkey. However, that shouldn’t lead us as people to not be critical of Putin’s harsh policies.
The primary reason Putin is hated is because he’s not a new world sexually confused and pro homosexual agenda person,but a traditionalist rooted in Christian and family values,eschewed by so many hell bitch zio scum,and of course he is a nationalist for Russia,a very similar description of DT and his stances.
For a slightly-fictionalized treatment (but just as celebratory of US meddling in Russian elections), watch Spinning Boris.
aside. wrt Binny below.
I read with interest, in the past few days, Bill Binny remarking on the proverbial ’12 yr. old super geek’ with an Asus Laptop who, presumably sitting in mom’s kitchen, could put an opponent in internet ‘check-mate’, so to speak, in three moves, or less. *this is also a topic benitoe often eludes to and he’s not dumb … I don’t care what they say.
I know you are very organized, and often quite tidy with this kind of information, in general. Be a lamb dear, please. .. I’ll be back in three shakes of a lambs tail.
p.s. Also, will wonders never cease!?
Hey Doug (Couldn’t post this response below)
I know you’ve got IT tech skills (I have some) and I appreciate your contributions to this list so I’ll just do like most of us with any list cred do to make a point. Cite verifiable facts and let the chips fall where they may.
Doug Contends: “…The Treasure Map (in planning stages a couple of years ago) is intended to map the global Internet down to the level of, say, routers at ISPs and/or larger organizational entities. There is no indication that the program is intended to extend to lower-level devices or to capture and/or copy traffic (certainly not the content of traffic). In any case, the resources, budget, manpower necessary to do that would be beyond capacity (and batshit craziness) levels of even the NSA. And that’s without considering what it would take to actually store, monitor and search all that content.”
Christian: Actually Doug yes there is evidence the program was intended to extend to lower level devices. Der Spiegel broke the story in 2014 that the NSAs intention (way back in 2011) was to do just that.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/snowden-documents-indicate-nsa-has-breached-deutsche-telekom-a-991503.html
“…Treasure Map is anything but harmless entertainment. Rather, it is the mandate for a massive raid on the digital world. It aims to map the Internet, and not just the large traffic channels, such as telecommunications cables. It also seeks to identify the devices across which our data flows, so-called routers. Furthermore, every single end device that is connected to the Internet somewhere in the world — every smartphone, tablet and computer — is to be made visible. Such a map doesn’t just reveal one treasure. There are millions of them…”
Christian: And there you have it “every smartphone, tablet and computer — is to be made visible”. And that was five years ago before the Gemalto (largest SIM card manufacturer) and equally unsettling “Equation Group”revelations.
“The breathtaking mission is described in a Treasure Map presentation from the documents of the former intelligence service employee Edward Snowden which SPIEGEL has seen. It instructs analysts to “map the entire Internet — Any device, anywhere, all the time.”
Doug Contends: The bottom line is that it is effectively impossible, in many if not most circumstances, to know with certainty the source of a hack, the identity of the hacker or the reason for the attack.
Christian: No offense Doug but I’m with Laura Poitras, Craig Murray, Julian Assange, Bill Binney, Marcy Wheeler and Ed Snowden on this. If you’re already being tracked like Jacob Appelbaum 24/7 using every device in his vicinity every time he moves around the room, changes devices, opens Tor or boots Tails or Linux or visits Wikileaks or the Intercept your “handlers” are going to know about it. Bruce Schneier (like TIs Micah) says we should all of course do whatever we can to secure our communications to make it more difficult for them BUT if you really are a priority NSA FBI DHS target there really is NO PLACE TO HIDE.
At any rate I read all your stuff and we’re lucky to have you here :-)
“There is no indication that the program is intended to extend to lower-level devices or to capture and/or copy traffic (certainly not the content of traffic).”
Actually, there is an indication. And who says it would be global or has to be? Wouldn’t it be more efficient and effective, if say, you identified a target using data collection methods, then use other alternative methods to spy on that target, such as pushing spyware to a person’s smartphone, for example or to their PC.
Yes that would be more efficient.
“Any device, anywhere, all the time.”
I read a tech article recently where the author pinged every device on the planet (6+ billion addresses) connected to the internet. It took less than 6 hours, from his desktop. He gave his IP address so you could view when he pinged you.
I’ll wager the big boys know within seconds when anything connects.
Yes that’s true.6 Billion. And that was just one (1) guy.
If we combine most or all of the NSA controlled worldwide network of Five Eyes XKeyscore Ready Server Farms (Bluffdale, Maryland, New York, Europe, Middle East’ Latin America, Africa and so on) with the combined IT Resources of every Tech Corp (ISP, CABLE, SEARCH, SOCIAL MEDIA) they’ve bribed, cajoled, co-opted or threatened into compliance all over the world collecting it all from “any device anywhere all the time” seems EASILY within the technical realm of possibility.
The buffers in place to allow for real time analysis or “Full Take” are not necessary for STORING “Full Take” nor RETRIEVING, MODIFYING or DEPLOYING “Full Take” in the future.
Of course its been very helpful that they’ve been able to conduct most of
This is a bit of an open ended argument, is it not?
Actually, by 2012, there were nearly nine billion Internet-connected devices, the vast majority of them mobile (thus frequently changing router connections at various levels). Cisco (no doubt exaggerating at least a bit) projects more than 50 billion by 2020.
It is, simply, infeasible, in terms of resources and organization, to continually track all of those connected devices and their various constantly-changing stateless connections, and to continuously store that endlessly-changing data, much less to add the burden of storing the actual content. And it would be pointless to do so.
No offense, Christian but, although the above is true, only a teeny, tiny, itsy-bitsy number of Internet users are under such surveillance at any given time. And there is no reason, of which we are aware, to believe that the alleged hacker(s) was/were among that very select group. So I’m afraid that the fact that a known, “high-value target” can be tracked in that way is really irrelevant (If I were running a “Russian hacking operation,” I’d make damned sure that the actual agents were unknown nobodies in random and unlikely locations around the world). The universe of Internet users cannot be and are not so tracked.
No offense taken. ;^)
“every smartphone, tablet and computer — is to be made visible.”
does not equate to
” the burden of storing the actual content. “
That’s right, nuf, it doesn’t. But to actually know enough to make relevant comments, you probably ought to read the whole subthread, starting with the OP:
Emphasis added.
Doug,
Treasure Map is only one (1) way the NSA can identify devices and their users. Making sure they have the passwords for ever SIM card produced by Gemalto is another. All the content sent, received or stored by those devices is as we know intercepted scores of different ways, at an unknowable number of collection points (Five Eyes, Hacking Team, Palantir, Booze Allen, Your Local Fusion Center, ManTech, Your Next Door Neighbor, Google, Facebook, upstream, downstream, domestically or internationally.
What tools whomever uses to collect all the content from all the devices within a given organization or network which may (or may not) be present on the current version of NSAs Treasure Map is up to those collecting or seizing those records.
“you probably ought to read the whole subthread,”
If you think I didn’t, well, that’s on you.
ChristianCHolmer did a good job of explaining it.
I think it’s interesting to note the drop in the number of connected devices; all those old clunky giga-byte devices are getting replaced by tera-byte devices (3 orders of magnitude) yet the drop in devices was only a factor of 2. (It won’t belong before we have smart dildos … and I am not searching that one to find out :|
Their motto is “collect it all.”
You’re correct we don’t know how many are under surveillance to the extent Jacob is but once they have your pattern of life and have worked up your psychological profile I expect much of their ongoing data collection, MITM attacks, Quantum inserts, facebook news feed changes, and JTRIG style harassment campaigns designed to change your behavior (BLM, OCCUPY, FOIA FILER, ANIMAL RIGHT ACTIVIST, PEACE ACTIVIST, FREQUENT WIKILEAKS OR INTERCEP POSTERS, TOR USERS ETC ETC) based on your digital doppleganger (Jacobs term your comprehensive digital dossier they use to try to predict your future criminal intent)) to allow their servers and software (with minimal human intervention if any at all) to create your very own built to order Room 101.
They really can do any of us like Martin Luther King, Glenn Greenwald at the speed of light for pennies a day.
Pedinska, rrheard and Doug Salzmann
“…….It presumes there was a “hack” as opposed to a “leak” from someone or more than one someone within either the DNC and/or one of the US intelligence agencies……”
Cyber-security firm Crowdstrike examined the DNC computer and determined that two Russian government associated “hactivist” breached the DNC computer network. Two addition cyber-security firms confirmed the findings of Crowdstrike (“Bears in the Midst: Intrusion into the Democratic National Committee” http://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/).
So unless you think that Crowdstrike is making this up, then there is very strong evidence that the DNC network was hacked. But you all knew this already:
“……We deployed our IR team and technology and immediately identified two sophisticated adversaries on the network – COZY BEAR and FANCY BEAR. We’ve had lots of experience with both of these actors attempting to target our customers in the past and know them well. In fact, our team considers them some of the best adversaries out of all the numerous nation-state, criminal and hacktivist/terrorist groups we encounter on a daily basis…….”
These cyber-analysts disagree: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/
[ start excerpt ]
“The bottom line is that the NSA would know where and how any ‘hacked’ emails from the DNC, HRC or any other servers were routed through the network. This process can sometimes require a closer look into the routing to sort out intermediate clients, but in the end sender and recipient can be traced across the network.
“The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating – saying things like ‘our best guess’ or “our opinion” or ‘our estimate’ etc. – shows that the emails alleged to have been ‘hacked’ cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA’s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.
“The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider – as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.”
[end excerpt]
Signed by
William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator
Larry Johnson, former CIA Intelligence Officer & former State Department Counter-Terrorism Official
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA (ret.)
Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA (ret.)
image_pdf
Thanks Paul. There is disagreement within the intelligence community, but there is also considerable support from cyber-security firms familiar with the story.
“Bears in the Midst”
That’s a dog-whistle you hear, craig.
No, Craig. They determined that hackers compromised DNC networks. They have beliefs that 2 independent hacker groups were involved, which they named ‘Bears’, but they provide no evidence or methodology to show the intent of the hackers, who they work for, what they took, or whether anything they took ended up in Wikileaks.
At a very basic level, can you show these hackers are state actors and not hacktivists or criminals, without relying on unsubstantiated assertions from Crowdstrike?
We do know some about Fancy Bear(s). They apparently are based, not in Russia, but France (based on a WHOIS search on fancybear.net). And apparently, they are not big fans of Serbia (They revealed the names of at least two Serbian athletes with exemptions from WADA) or Russia (revealing that Misha Aloyan had an exemption from WADA).
They also claim to be associated with Anonymous, so yeah, they are hacktivists.
https://fancybear.net/
Hey Craig,
I see your still stirring up the natives. Personally, I appreciate the fact that you are at least making your opposition better articulate their positions; clarity is good for all.
It appears that the sole criteria of CrowdStrike’s claim that any particular hacktivist’s actions rise to the level of “state level actors” is determined by the level of sophistication that is employed in real time to avoid detection. Thus we have at least two sub criteria that appear to be essential to successfully hacking at a state level: (1) quality of equipment and (2) quality of personnel. The presumption being that it takes a considerable amount of time and money to devise the code that can successfully compromise the security protocols of leading cyber security firms without immediate detection. Sounds fairly reasonable.
The problem that I have with claims made by companyies who are operating at the level of CrowdStrike is that they are competing for billions of dollars worth of business. Such stakes necessitate a certain level of braggadocio and supposition that can only prove to be exaggerated, or outright false, in time. The claim that “state level” actors are compromising America’s electoral system with the intention of affecting the outcomes of its national elections is akin to providing the justification for war. The nurturing of such fear-inducing perceptions is currently understood to be an effective mean by which cyber security firms can win lucrative government contracts from competing states who have long been positioned to spy on one another. Take the example of George Kurtz who is the CEO and co-founder of CrowdStrike whose 2015 Fortune magazine claims attracted the attention of tech savvy critics such as Josh Weidner:
http://www.joshwieder.net/2015/08/crowdstrike-founder-george-kurtz-made.html
Setting aside for a moment the self-serving suppositions that are used by high-end cyber security firms to determine who is a state actor and who is not, there are other elements of their business models that make them vulnerable to reaching false conclusions. For instance, it is widely understood that hiring former intelligence operatives and/or ex politicians into key positions is a proven method of leveraging access to state agencies. it is for this reason that company’s like CrowdStrike wear those associations on their promotional sleeve:
If all you have is a hammer, then every problem is treated as a nail. Former Intelligence and Law Enforcement officers are to cyber security firms as retired generals are to Military contractors; both can be relied upon to interpret all problems in a manner that warrants the services and/or products being touted.
Lastly, I have a problem with George Kurtz’s choice of “business partners.” It was a private equity firm, Warburg Pincus, who provided Kurtz with his start-up money. Warburg-Pincus is the latest outgrowth of the Warburg banking empire whose global business ties included the Nazi Reichsbank and I.G Farben. Currently, WarburgPincus bills itself as:
As much as Eric Warburg’s Nazi associations were whitewashed as a necessary precondition to obscuring his role in providing ex Nazis with the mean to immigrate to the United States under Operation Paperclip, his wholly pragmatic approach to funding state aligned companies like I.G Farben and CrowdStrike calls into question the nature of those he chose to gamble on..
One important clarification:
CrowdStrike was founded in 2011 and Eric Warburg’s role with Warburg Pincus ended with his death in 1990. However, Lionel Pincus further built on Warburg’s name and used the clout of their firm to roll back federal regulation that, when absent, eventually set the stage for the 2008 global financial debacle. Although he too died before the founding of CrowdStrike, the cumulative history of Warburg Pincus was, and still is, one of self interest above all else. By funding those who mirror its own single-minded commitment to optimizing profits, Warburg Pincus continues to employ Eric Warburg’s strategy of investing in those who are best positioned to facilitate the political ambitions and rationale of those in power.
Hi Karl
“……..The problem that I have with claims made by companyies who are operating at the level of CrowdStrike is that they are competing for billions of dollars worth of business…….The claim that “state level” actors are compromising America’s electoral system with the intention of affecting the outcomes of its national elections is akin to providing the justification for war. The nurturing of such fear-inducing perceptions is currently understood to be an effective mean by which cyber security firms can win lucrative government contracts from competing states who have long been positioned to spy on one another……”
You make valid points. Government contracts are huge in the intelligence community (as in lots of other businesses), so there certainly might be pressure to come up with the “right” solution. And hiring former government intelligence and law enforcement officers might lead to a “certain conclusion” as well. However, it also gives Crowdstrike an ability to recognize signature hackers – like Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear. Obviously, experience in these matters….matters.
Because there is so much money at stake with government contracts, private businesses absolutely have to retain their credibility with the government – so there is no benefit to giving the “right solution” in the long run – at least IMHO. There are conflicting claims – and some don’t add up. Craig Murray says he knows the “hacker” and he calls the DNC intrusion an inside job. If the DNC “hacker” comes forward, this might solve the problem once and for all. An insider could just download the emails without any footprint calling into question the identification of Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear by three independent cyber-security firms and the 17 intelligence departments in the US government. We’ll see (maybe).
Thanks.
Footprints of Cozy Bear and/or Fancy Bear on DNC computers does not negate the possibility that the DNC intrusion was an inside job. In fact, it could be argued that the very presence of spyware on DNC computes that can be easily identified with Russian Intelligence Hacker groups could have been placed there by the “insider” to cover his/her actions. In fact, misattribution and misdirection are standard trade craft for covert intelligence operatives.
Fair enough Karl. We will just have to wit and see (if, in fact, we ever find out the truth).
There is quite a bit of digital forensic evidence that points directly to Russian involvement. This presentation is two hours long, and goes into some pretty serious detail about what is known about the hacks, phishing, etc…
—-
Streamed live on Dec 8, 2016
Since the June 2016 announcement that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) had been breached by two Russia-based threat groups known as FANCY BEAR and COZY BEAR, the story has evolved from a presumed espionage operation into a series of strategic leaks and conflicting attribution claims. In this presentation, we’ll demonstrate techniques used to identify additional malicious infrastructure, assess the validity of the Guccifer 2.0 persona and other outlets like DCLeaks, and the strength of the attribution analysis.
Toni Gidwani is the Director of Research Operations at ThreatConnect and leads ThreatConnect’s research team, an elite group of globally-acknowledged cybersecurity experts dedicated to tracking down existing and emerging cyber threats. Prior to joining ThreatConnect, Toni led analytic teams in the U.S. Department of Defense. She is an adjunct faculty member at Georgetown University.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qi5T8B4-nU&sns=fb
That’s a very long presentation, most of it generic. Which part specifically did you find convincing? From a cursory look at it, it seems the best they got is their claim that Guccifer 2.0’s native language appears to be Russian, not Romanian. Any evidence that Guccifer 2.0 is working for a state actor? None apparently.
While there are some indications that Guccifer 2.0 passed some material to Wikileaks, it doesn’t look like that’s how they got all their material on the DNC and the Hillary campaign.
Interestingly, they also present evidence that Guccifer 2.0 is a fairly naive hacker. He uses an aol.com email account, and from that it was possible to figure out the IP address of the VPN he was using.
As much as anything, that vid appears to be mostly self-promotion for the company that conducted the presentation.
I didn’t watch it in detail, but I certainly didn’t see any evidence that suggested penetrations by sophisticated nation-state actors. Rather it looks like some unknown and not necessarily skilled hacker(s) used phishing/spearphishing exploits to install some clunky and some fairly elegant malware on the poorly-secured Windows (!) machines of users with terrible operational security habits (and probably little training or supervision).
The malware could have come from anywhere, including from sophisticated bad guys who released it into the wild for amateurs and script kiddies to play with — for whatever reason.
Based upon what I saw and heard with a quick scan, I’m not giving that presentation two hours of my attention but, if you have some specific piece you think might make knowledgeable skeptics take a more careful look, please give us the time code.
Funny how the Obama administration is paranoid about leaks, yet when someone leaks information about a classified CIA report to the Washington Post, the administration doesn’t seem remotely concerned about finding and prosecuting the person who made this unauthorized disclosure.
Obama isn’t paranoid about leaks, he’s paranoid about accountability. Like the rest of the US Corporate Party.
We the People – demand an investigation and a release to the public of these hacking activities. These acts should make the election “null and void’ as it was NOT a free election. Foreign powers can’t decide our election
1
Okay, this headline is also part of the problem. It presumes there was a “hack” as opposed to a “leak” from someone or more than one someone within either the DNC and/or one of the US intelligence agencies.
The distinction between “hack” and “leak” in this ongoing saga, seems to me to be pretty important. Now I have little ability to test the veracity of Craig Murray’s statement(s) or the veracity of statement(s) of those Murray has purportedly met or spoken with.
Nevertheless, seems to me it is important as part of The Intercept’s journalism to not implicitly endorse the unverified supposition that the Podesta and DNC materials (two different sets, released by two different individuals/groups apparently) were a function of “hacks” rather than “leaks” (or one or the other depending on which batch of materials we are discussing). All internal links worth a read as well.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-12/intelligence-officer-who-personally-met-democratic-email-leaker-confirms-he-was-amer
Okay, this headline is also part of the problem. It presumes there was a “hack” as opposed to a “leak” from someone or more than one someone within either the DNC and/or one of the US intelligence agencies.
I agree with you on the distinction, but I would say that the headline is accurate in that it is asking for verifiable evidence of the claim being made, which is that there was a hack.
It’s sort of a nitpick, and one that I don’t differ with you on, but how are they to ask for evidence of something not being claimed? I am guessing that evidence will not be proffered, especially if it shows that the “hack” was actually a leak as so many suspect and some, like Craig Murray abd Bill Binney (both of whom I value as credible due to their track records), claim to know for sure.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/tell-russia-hacked-election.html
“within either the DNC and/or one of the US intelligence agencies.”
Or the Clinton campaign.
I cannot even imagine the amount of disgruntlement and/or guilty conscience it would take to dislodge one of that crew…..we’re talkin’ Jonestown-level operant conditioning…and that doesn’t include the True Believers. But never say, “never”, I guess. :-s
I was thinking of a disgruntled IT staffer (Bernie supporter) who had access. But yea, I see what you mean. ;)
Agreed. And not only does the headline refer, blithely, to “hacking,” but to “Russian hacking” — with nary an “alleged” to be seen.
Like, apparently, nearly everyone else on the planet, I haven’t seen any actual evidence for the asserted hacks, so I can’t render a confident judgment. However: (1) I do have 30-plus years of systems administration experience; (2) the purported evidence that has been bandied about is is no evidence at all; (3) most of the claims of Russian hacking rely heavily upon appeals to the authority and supposed superpowers of Crowdstrike, other private security outfits and/or the NSA and, notwithstanding Ed Snowden’s revelations and his personal belief in NSA omniscience, (a) appeal to authority is a logical fallacy and (b) it is difficult in the extreme, sometimes simply impossible, to know with certainty the origin of a hacking attempt, the ultimate destination of any exfiltrated data or the identit[y|ies] of the hacker(s) — even if you are the NSA.
Under the circumstances, it is fundamentally dishonest (or cluelessly credulous) to be making claims, or even accusations, about “Russian hacking” of DNC servers, Podesta’s email or anything else associated with the recent election. And it is careless and irresponsible to use the terminology of the accusers without qualification — without even scare quotes.
TI, you should fix this.
And it is careless and irresponsible to use the terminology of the accusers without qualification — without even scare quotes.
Yes. The addition of the word alleged would make the headline appropriate.
It would be interesting to know who performs this process, which we’ve been told is usually not the author of the piece – and the methods employed. Are they just pulled out of a hat, or is there some applicable rules used in the creation. Enquiring minds and all dat… :-s
“It would be interesting to know who performs this process, which we’ve been told is usually not the author of the piece …”
It is the editor who creates the headline.
“Are they just pulled out of a hat,”
Yeah, an ass-hat
“Obama Must Declassify Evidence of Russian Hacking”
I think you are correct, rr.
“must declassify evidence” asserts evidence exists “of Russian hacking”.
Obama Must Declassify Evidence A Hack Occurred
Evidence of a hack would include the perpetrator.
Betsy, would you please correct the headline.
(TI may use my contribution for a nominal donation to an animal shelter or foodbank)
Hack vs. Leak
Well, it has to be a hack, doesn’t it? Because if it was a leak, then why is the CIA involved? Everyone’s been adamant about the CIA investigating.
Wouldn’t that upset a certain USG agency such as the FBI? It would also upset the whole Red Scare meme.
Think about what I’ve just implied. A domestic leak being identified by the CIA.
If you believe Assange/Murray, then what can you conclude about the CIA’s involvement in all of this?
Well, the CIA may be trying to keep some of their operations going which would face some scrutiny (if not total destruction) in a Trump administration, such as the “rat line” to the Syrian rebels and regime change operations in Russia.
Part may also be agency loyalty. According to Roger Morris’s 1996 “Partners in Power: The Clintons and their America”, Bill Clinton had ties with the CIA, dating back to his college years, where he spied on Americans abroad.
“Soviet agent?” LOL
WDC and American politics has become a home, a center of gravity, for power predators – persons afflicted with a mental disorder much like kleptomania. The CIA & NSA black holes for it all, nests for the cultivation of tentacles of cancer. It seems to be getting a lot worse – attacking the host as it were.
President Obama don’t know nothing. He didn’t even get up this morning. That’s why he ordered, and strongly suggested, a full and comprehensive review of this Russian skullduggery by all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies.
*like everybody else, y’all can read all about at the Obama Library in about 12 years. … maybe.
The end.
NSAs Treasure Map (the NSAs perpetualy updated global map of all devices all networks and all users all the time everywhere) makes a copy of everything sent to or from every network and device on its way to Bluffdale.
Snowden, Binney, Appelbaum , Assange, Bamford know this. The only people on this list that don’t know this even after visiting search.edwardsnowden.com are either establishment flunkies or delusional halfwits.
https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/
All signs point to leaking, not hacking. If hacking were involved, the National Security Agency would know it – and know both sender and recipient.
In short, since leaking requires physically removing data – on a thumb drive, for example – the only way such data can be copied and removed, with no electronic trace of what has left the server, is via a physical storage device.
Awesome Technical Capabilities
Again, NSA is able to identify both the sender and recipient when hacking is involved. Thanks largely to the material released by Edward Snowden, we can provide a full picture of NSA’s extensive domestic data-collection network including Upstream programs like Fairview, Stormbrew and Blarney. These include at least 30 companies in the U.S. operating the fiber networks that carry the Public Switched Telephone Network as well as the World Wide Web. This gives NSA unparalleled access to data flowing within the U.S. and data going out to the rest of the world, as well as data transiting the U.S.
In other words, any data that is passed from the servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) or of Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC) – or any other server in the U.S. – is collected by the NSA. These data transfers carry destination addresses in what are called packets, which enable the transfer to be traced and followed through the network.
https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2016/12/12/ron-paul-on-election-hack-do-we-believe-snowden-and-assange-or-mccain-and-graham/
On one hand we have the Washington Post reporting that the CIA has determined that the Russians have hacked the US election to put Donald Trump in the White House. The evidence is secret, but the CIA and the Post wouldn’t lie, would they?
Then we have global warmongering Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-NC) demanding that the US take action against Russia in retaliation for the “hack” that was reported by the Washington Post based on a secret briefing by the CIA. On the other hand we have Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, whose organization published the leaked DNC documents, saying that the Russians were not behind it. Whistleblower Ed Snowden has said that the NSA most certainly knows the identity of the DNC leakers/hackers. So who do we believe – Assange and Snowden or McCain and Graham? More in today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report.
That’s just not true. The Treasure Map (in planning stages a couple of years ago) is intended to map the global Internet down to the level of, say, routers at ISPs and/or larger organizational entities.
There is no indication that the program is intended to extend to lower-level devices or to capture and/or copy traffic (certainly not the content of traffic). In any case, the resources, budget, manpower necessary to do that would be beyond capacity (and batshit craziness) levels of even the NSA. And that’s without considering what it would take to actually store, monitor and search all that content.
The actual role of the Treasure Map appears to be as an aid to planning the NSA’s own cyberattacks on “enemies” — a big expensive digital version of the map tables you see in old war movies, with planners and commanders moving replica forces around on simulated terrain.
Further, the faith the VIPS guys and Ed Snowden (good, smart guys, for sure) have in the NSA’s ability to know for certain who hacked what, when and from where is, at least, too great.
While it is true, as the VIPS memo states, that the NSA has awesome technical capabilities that permit it to watch the flow of data on the ‘net, it is also true that the very foundational design of the net and the operating systems of the computers that run it, make it relatively straightforward to spoof or disguise identity, point of origin and destination in ways that would be very difficult to detect. Even if you’re the NSA.
The bottom line is that it is effectively impossible, in many if not most circumstances, to know with certainty the source of a hack, the identity of the hacker or the reason for the attack.
All of this points to a huge problem in our over-technologized society: The vast majority of the populace has no bloody idea how the systems they use and depend upon everyday actually work, and so they have to depend upon the priests who know the sacred secrets to keep things running — and they have to decide which priests to believe when there is a disagreement.
All of that said, I agree with the VIPS guys: A leak is much more likely than a hack.
Hey Doug,
I know you’ve got IT tech skills (I have some) and I appreciate your contributions to this list so I’ll just do like most of us with any list cred do to make a point. Cite verifiable facts and let the chips fall where they may.
Doug Contends: “…The Treasure Map (in planning stages a couple of years ago) is intended to map the global Internet down to the level of, say, routers at ISPs and/or larger organizational entities. There is no indication that the program is intended to extend to lower-level devices or to capture and/or copy traffic (certainly not the content of traffic). In any case, the resources, budget, manpower necessary to do that would be beyond capacity (and batshit craziness) levels of even the NSA. And that’s without considering what it would take to actually store, monitor and search all that content.”
Christian: Actually Doug yes there is evidence the program was intended to extend to lower level devices. Der Spiegel broke the story in 2014 that the NSAs intention (way back in 2011) was to do just that.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/snowden-documents-indicate-nsa-has-breached-deutsche-telekom-a-991503.html
“…Treasure Map is anything but harmless entertainment. Rather, it is the mandate for a massive raid on the digital world. It aims to map the Internet, and not just the large traffic channels, such as telecommunications cables. It also seeks to identify the devices across which our data flows, so-called routers. Furthermore, every single end device that is connected to the Internet somewhere in the world — every smartphone, tablet and computer — is to be made visible. Such a map doesn’t just reveal one treasure. There are millions of them…”
Christian: And there you have it “every smartphone, tablet and computer — is to be made visible”. And that was five years ago before the Gemalto and Equation Group revelations.
“The breathtaking mission is described in a Treasure Map presentation from the documents of the former intelligence service employee Edward Snowden which SPIEGEL has seen. It instructs analysts to “map the entire Internet — Any device, anywhere, all the time.”
Doug Contends: The bottom line is that it is effectively impossible, in many if not most circumstances, to know with certainty the source of a hack, the identity of the hacker or the reason for the attack.
Christian: No offense Doug but I’m with Laura Poitras, Craig Murray, Julian Assange, Bill Binney, Marcy Wheeler and Ed Snowden on this. If you’re already being tracked like Jacob Appelbaum (24/7 using every device in his possesion or general vicinity) every time you open Tor (mask your identity), boot from Tails or Linux, or even simply move to a different device or begin entering a command line your “handlers” are going to know about it. Bruce Schneier (like Micah) says we should all of course do whatever we can to secure our communications to make it more difficult for them BUT if you really are a priority NSA FBI DHS target they’ve got an algorithm for your digital doppleganger and there really is NO PLACE TO HIDE.
At any rate I read all your stuff and we’re lucky to have you here :-)
Hillaryous;A disaster not to investigate a myth.
These idiots are getting tiresome,as the only way Russia affected our election was through the people who watched RT,or some other Russian web site,where they found more truth there,than in the whole serial lying Zionist News Networks leviathan of BS.
Oh hi dahoit, say how is that marvelous Trump resistance against powerful Israel you’ve been blabbering on about for months going?
He seems to have the Zionist West Bank settlers fooled into loving him, believing he is a total fucking toady for them, wow what a genius huh?
I think Trump will make them an offer they can’t refuse,to settle the absolute disaster we currently live with.
Every zionist media outlet has been anti Trump since his announcement of evenhandedness re IP.
And they are still hard at work on clowns like you to continue the stupidity,as why would he reward his torturers with a gift that has no upside for America?America first insists on solving the worst anti American wellspring on the planet,our defense of the indefensible conflict there.
Will he ignore the zionists?No.as they are a very influential and powerful force on little minded schmucks,business and policy,and their media has so many under their BS sway,but his Russian stance and picks so far for his cabinet,are all non zio approved,except the Fed guy possibly,which bodes well for his future independence.
You may have heard about how the leading “intellectual” of the Alt-Reich was recently at an event at Texas A&M that caused many student protests.
Most media seems to have completely ignored what the event he had been invited to actually was. Mondoweiss is the only outlet I have seen the event itself reported in.
The event was a “debate” with a “liberal” Rabbi. The Rabbi started talking about how Judaism, for him, was about radical love and inclusion.
The Alt-reich guy, in his opening statement, said how he had always admired the Jewish people for their ability to maintain their cultural identity even in multicultural situations, and how they even worked this into the creation of a state based entirely on cultural identity, where those who were not of the culture were unapologetically seen as lesser. He stated that his idea of “White Nationalism” was consciously based on this cultural nationalism of the Jewish people, and especially the State of Israel.
This left the Rabbi debating him completely unable to respond.
Although I find both the Zionists and the Alt-Reich types completely abominable, I have to acknowledge that the Alt-Reich potentially can do far more damage to the idea of Zionism than BDS (which I do support) could ever do.
Their cozy relationship will pull off the masks by which they maintain a vestige of respectability.
Thus, by someone like Drumpf being pro-Zionist, Zionism is discredited.
(True, Hitler was a pro-Zionist too, but that information has long been supressed.)
“Oh hi dahoit, say how is that marvelous Trump resistance against powerful Israel you’ve been blabbering on about for months going? ”
Who do you think is having a shit-fit over Trump and Putin? Russia has essentially ended the CIA funded war against Assad. Poor Israel, that new home they picked out for the Palestinians isn’t available now.
Just look at the shit storm of news about how terrible Russia is. All of these headlines appear today simultaneously at DailyBeast.
Remember the babies in incubators dying in Kuwait?
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/736223/9-11-tower-Building-7-collapse-fire-conspiracy
Good stuff;Of course it was imploded.
It looked seemed and was.Same as the other 2.
The truth will set US free from zion.
ecommcon
Ecomcon;I think I first saw that term in 7 days in May.
!
“Same as the other 2.”
Yes. The NIST report is fraudulent. (One of the biggest laughs is the claim that an “unknown organic compound” caused the orange color of the molten “aluminum” seen pouring out of the structure. Aluminum doesn’t have the thermal mass to do what liquid steel does. No one has ever even proposed, before or since, that an organic compound might turn molten aluminum orange until NIST clowns got involved.)
The NIST also certifies seed numbers, which are believed to be compromised, for elliptic encryption. The criminals have corrupted every level of government. It’s going to take someone like Trump to dial it back a bit …
unbelievable. you guys actually still think Trump is anti-Zionist.
Trump is an American nationalist.Is he sympathetic to Jewish nationalism?A lot of people are,even I understand their wish for a state of their own.And I would be totally supportive if it was the light unto nations it alleges it is,instead of nazi redux
Trump will work for our interests.Bottom line.Hoo hah!
Mr. Scahill and Mr. Schwarz
“……The reality, however, is that Trump’s reference to the Iraq War and the debacle over weapons of mass destruction is both utterly cynical and a perfectly valid point. U.S. intelligence agencies have repeatedly demonstrated that they regularly both lie and get things horribly wrong. In this case they may well be correct, but they cannot expect Americans to simply take their word for it…….”
You seem to be forgetting that it was the independent cyber-security firm, Crowdstrike, that initially identified the source of the “hack” as Russian operatives. Additionally, Crowdstrike had two cyber-security firms confirm their interpretation of the results with an independent analysis. It borders on a conspiracy theory to believe that Crowdstrike just made this up in service to the US government, or because they are anti-Russian.
It’s another Intercept article (pleading for a whistleblower) leaving out important information.
did you hear that BASHAR & RUSSIANS PREVAIL IN ALEPPO, AL-NUSRA etal HAVE BEEN REMOVED!
PressTV-Aleppo liberation operation reaches end
http://presstv.com/Detail/2016/12/12/497550/Syria-Aleppo-militants-Daesh
does that change things with respect to the YINON PLAN?
How’s Haifa?
The word is a number of “foreign military consultants” were captured by the gov forces in Aleppo. If Russians were really up to delivering a media bomb, they would reveal the identities of aforementioned persons, but for some reason I am sure there will be a cover up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incident
Not happening here.
http://presstv.com/Detail/2016/12/12/497619/aleppo-liberation-celebration-syria
the dumb&dumbers of Hellary and Co wanted to prolong this conflict.
they lost big and in record time.
The MSM presstitutes have been already dispatched to write about “orgies,” “debauchery,” and “burning alive” in Aleppo. See the totally degraded Spiegel and even a more damaged Reuters.
Meanwhile, both Merkel and Holland (the latter is a the 4%-approval-rate guy, that is, he is “within the margin of error” empty suit) have suddenly developed am empathy for “people of Aleppo.” Should not they first look at gargoyle Sarkozy that ordered bombing the civilians of Libya and other war criminals like Blair and Obama that have created the Middle Eastern catastrophe? The catastrophe is overflowing to Europe, but the poodles are not allowed to think in such terms. Both Merkel and Holland were OK with giving green light to the slaughter of civilians in the Middle East by the US-owned NATO, but now they are trying to show their “humanitarian” side.
ah. You should also know that when you believe ALT-NEWS like “RUSSIA DID IT” you are risking buying into an ALT-REALITY. Holding onto such alt-realities will lead to a psychoses. Not being treated for a psychoses will then lead to paranoia which then leads to manifestations of slaughtering others in the name of self defence.
have a nice day
There is almost no information available on the principles who control Crowdstrike and a very sketchy history of only about 10 years. Given the Black ops projects of the FBI, NSA, CIA, it is not beyond possiblity that the company like dozens of others is merely a fully funded operation of one of those agencies.
With a history of Clapper lying to congress and Comey of the FBI either intentionally or by incompetence releasing false information days before the election, there are many indications that our secret police agencies have been as willing to influence our elections as they have interfered in other countries world wide such as Chile, Honduras, Guatemala and others.
That his been my suspicion since the very first moment this subject was breached. As a business professional i have developed a nose for braggery and hype. This situation smacks of 100% hype. Total BS. Hoodwink. Scam. WMD con job.
I suspect the state department is corrupt. I suspect the state dept and the cia operate as one. The cia, imo, operates as a criminal enterprise, rationalising anything and everything. Their intrusion into relationships other than gathering information is a violation of democratic power.
“……..With a history of Clapper lying to congress and Comey of the FBI either intentionally or by incompetence releasing false information days before the election, there are many indications that our secret police agencies have been as willing to influence our elections as they have interfered in other countries world wide such as Chile, Honduras, Guatemala and others…..”
US intelligence does involve itself in other countries, but you are lacking evidence that the CIA, NSA, FBI etc intentionally (for political reasons) influence the outcomes of US elections. There is also no evidence that Crowdstrike is the long arm of the government intelligence agencies. Additionally, two cyber-security firms cross-checked the data of Crowdstrike with the same results.
I’ve read the Crowdstrike report. It’s light on details. They claim to have found what they believe to be 2 groups of hackers that had infiltrated the DNC for some time. They provide no details as to how they know the hackers are affiliated to the Russian government, and they provide no details as to how they know these hackers got documents that were later given to Wikileaks.
I understand they believe these groups are groups they have encountered in the past. But it’s unclear if they have a solid way of determining that, and it’s also unclear if the distribution of targets is such that it points to a state actor rather than a criminal organization.
Crowdstrike is certainly not an impartial observer, BTW. Their business is selling cybersecurity solutions to governments.
“Foreign influence”
What most people in the faking U$A (including these writers)
do not seem capable of realizing is
that the people are already controlled by the
“foreign influence” of the global corporatism which uses
the democrats and republicans to hide the fact that the
constitution of the “USA” is of very little importance to the
business of (so-called) Free Market Capitalism. It places
no value on anyone, anything, or anyplace beyond
how they can be used for private profits. There is no lie the
worshipers of capital will not use for private profit.
They have no “homeland.” They are not grounded in any belief,
except monetary global domination.
This is the shared religion of democrats and republicans and
they will always find someone else to blame for their own agenda.
that and the criminal currency system of PRINT-TO-LOAN-TO-OWN ponzi hot potato fraud that demands never ending growth like cancer, WILL DESTROY THE PLANET and take human civilisation with it.
The current currency system must be declared as illegal.
The people must wholly own ALL LIFE SUPPORT FOUNDATIONS.
Persons engaged in sabotaging life support must be charged, tried and convicted. Then shipped off to some island.
The word MUST must be changed to SHALL.
What most people in the faking U$A (including these writers)
do not seem capable of realizing is
that the people are already controlled by the
“foreign influence” of the global corporatism
Scahill wrote two books that would seem to belie your accusation. The first, Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army deals with one of the premier global mercenary companies in the world, basically for hire to the highest bidder in order to enforce their (almost always corporate) will wherever, whenever. He exposes the right-wing Republican ideology of Erik Prince, Blackwater’s founder, as well as much of his agenda on behalf of his ideology.
The second, Dirty Wars: The World Is a Battlefield, deals with America’s shadow wars, largely in the Middle East. I would posit that someone who traveled as much as Scahill did in researching this book would be highly unlikely to NOT understand how economics and the pursuit of private profit drive much of the profiteering inherent in such wars.
As for Jon Schwarz, he was Research Producer for Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story. That movie explored the following topics:
That film, produced in 2009, was very specific in calling out administrations of both flavors. The only thing missing was an evisceration of Obama, who would go on to preside over the fiscal misconduct involved in avoiding the prosecution of the criminals who caused the 2008 crash. But I doubt Jon has been as blinkered as you so rashly accuse him of as to not see and understand that reality.
In short, your accusation wrt these two authors is largely baseless.
I understand your typical need to NOT read and quote my
WHOLE sentence.
The point of my complete sentence was that these authors and the
vast majority of people cling to the glaringly BOGUS delusion
that the democrats and republicans are supposedly separate parties
when then reality is that they are two sides of
the same agenda.
The need to see the democrats and republicans as separate parties
is a manufactured delusion which they seem to need.
There are two people who best represent the obnoxiousness
which is central to the democrat/republican scam –
Donald Trump and Rahm Emanuel. These two lousy predators
are the two-faced central reality of the republican/democrat
religiosity
which way way way too many people seem incapable of
allowing into their two-party delusions.
Sure, they and others (like Moore) will criticize the beast,
but their criticism is almost always based in a belief that the
democrats can be a beneficial balance and that bogus notion
is clearly ridiculous and deadly.
There is a continuum of corruption and the Trumps, Clintons,
Bushes, Cheneys, Obamas, are devout supporters.
The separation of corruption by the nominal party affiliation
is how these predators keep getting a free pass to continue the
escalation of corruptions.
Your misrepresentation of my words is typical liberal crap.
You are pretending that you are objective while you give preference
to one side of the same crap as is produced by both
democrats and republicans.
I understand your typical need to NOT read and quote my
WHOLE sentence.
I believe I addressed the remainder of your sentence, which wasn’t hidden by any means as it was right above, in the rest of my response. The only reason I truncated was because that bit was the nugget of my objection, but if you want to see some sort of nefariousness on my part, well, whatever. :-s
The point of my complete sentence was that these authors and the
vast majority of people cling to the glaringly BOGUS delusion
that the democrats and republicans are supposedly separate parties
when then reality is that they are two sides of
the same agenda.
And my point was, that while I think you are correct about the vast majority, these particular writers have amply exhibited in their writing to date that they don’t fall under that broadly encompassing umbrella. YMM and does, vary. But I actually presented evidence, as opposed to assertions.
Moore is a separate beast – only connected to this via Schwarz’s former employment – and a disappointing one, imho. There is plenty of evidence that he still clings to the democrat side of the duopoly. But this assertion,
their criticism is almost always based in a belief that the
democrats can be a beneficial balance and that bogus notion
is clearly ridiculous and deadly.
shouldn’t be hard to document for Scahill and Schwarz, so give us some examples. I am more than happy to change my mind when presented with something like evidence.
Your misrepresentation of my words is typical liberal crap.
You are pretending that you are objective while you give preference
to one side of the same crap as is produced by both
democrats and republicans.
lol. I am far to the left of liberal. I haven’t voted for either party in a very long time, but go ahead and make more assumptions. I actually agree with the vast majority of what you wrote above, but go ahead and continue to label me based on the small bit I quoted – which was clearly available for others to see in its entirety – while continuing to refuse to offer proof of the bit I did disagree with. I’m sure others here will find that convincing.
“I’m sure others here will find that convincing.”
It’s official; you can remove now the word “largely” from your acknowledgment of the “baseless” charge laid against the authors.
:)
The duopoly of dem rep hated Donald Trump for being a renegade to their agenda.
Unless they are just too slick for words,and their total resistance and slander re him were just a smokescreen,and they really loved him.sheesh.Stop the nonsense.
Will they love him in the future?I have a feeling the scum will follow the voters towards a new American way,US first,and the profits to come.
Such is the pull of strong leadership.
No more puppets for zion.Yee haw!
CIA involvment
Bill Clinton was groomed to the White House from way back
There are too many co-incidental premature deaths surrounding the Clintons
George Soros backs the Clintons
Hillary was fraudulently promoted to be the dem candidate
Hillary lost the election but the somethings behind her arent quitting
the CIA is in the business of putting their person at the top of country politics
Now the somethings who also want war in Syria are trying to turn the Electorals
my eduated guess: the CIA murdered Seth Rich
It probably would have been much more credible to demand that Obama release evidence when he had the “Intelligence Community” issue a press release in the last month of the election accusing Russia of hacking our democracy for Trump. And this was after spending countless hours pushing this story anonymously through friendly journalists.
But now that Trump won, Obama is worried about his legacy, and rightly so–he used the “Intelligence Community” to manipulate our election, and Trump is probably not going to be be very forgiving about that.
If I were Obama I would be running around as fast I could to come up with as much evidence as possible (by hook or by crook) to try and justify my undemocratic actions during this election.
But the real question is what did Obama know and when did he know it.
The key thing to keep in mind is that they were pushing this story behind the scenes for a long time–and that is not the actions of someone who is trying to morally and credibly deal with a crisis of democracy–these are the actions of a disinformation plan designed to promote one candidate over another.
If we are going to have anything resembling a credible Democracy, then Obama’s actions during this election must be investigated. Democracy can’t survive a president who uses the “Intelligence Community” to manipulate and control an Election to favor his chosen candidate.
The only reason democrats are talking about investigations and evidence is because Obama is about to be outed by the incoming president for using the “Intelligence Community” to try and elect Hillary Clinton. And this is not going to be pretty.
The delusion that this is all about declassifying evidence or having credible investigations is pathetically laughable and shows that democratic partisans are not only unhinged, but really can’t see the train heading straight for them.
I expect this to get more and more hysterical as the true reality of what is going on starts to set in.
It would be a mistake for Mr. Trump to destroy the Democrats. The United States needs a two party system in order to provide an outlet for popular discontent and to ensure that the governing elite remain in control of the political system. Otherwise the only way that discontent can manifest itself is through revolution. I fear that Mr. Trump, lacking as he is in political experience, will not realize this until it is too late.
destroying the Democratic party will be like smacking a puddle of water. We will have many parties emerge and re-coalesce around that. It will be the best revolution the country could have. Crush them. After that, the people can do the same to the Republican party. The great reformation.
There are third parties that can quickly fill in the gap in most cases. Look at Georgia, where the Georgian Dream went after the corrupt UNM of Saakashvili. (Alas, the US and EU protested holding the corrupt Georgian officials accountable. Some even took them in and refused to extradite them. Ukraine took some in, though Poroschenko now regrets naming Saakashvili to run Odessa.) They gained 67 seats this year, while the UNM lost 19.
@Benito
I don’t think Trump wants to or will kill the democrats.
All he will do is write a “twitter essay” that will go something like this:
—
1) Just talked to intel community about Russia hacking. It was all bullshit.
2) Obama ordered intel heads to issue PR in last month of election over objection of rank and file to elect Hillary.
3) Media ate it up but I still won. Sore losers.
4) Congress can investigate Russia all it wants but remember you will be investigating Obama not me.
—
And that will literally put an end to this whole “masturba-story” because above all–number four is true.
AIPAC: Operation RUSSIA DID IT
The big 0 gumby said Trump would be blind wo the intelligence community.
0 has cataracts from the CIA.
A real hoot.
Yes,their opposition to DT is the product of revealing the truth to US regarding 9-11,OBL,Saddam and every other lie put before US in their effort to kill the enemies of zion.
ditto
Obama will not publish but Trump after inauguration will.
All over the web, it is “Russians did it”….. absolutely no evidence….. it is getting tiresome and boring and annoying.
All those claiming it, should just take a break and watch the 1966 movie, “The Russians are coming,The Russians are coming”….. it may help them think more critically!!
ZeroHedge has an interesting article. I especially like the Deep State graphic.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-13/deep-state-war-itself
That’s a reasonable analysis.
Some in the establishment see Trump as one of their own, and that’s reasonable. But others see him as a destabilizing figure who will further damage the reputation and standing of the American empire.
Under Trump, the CIA will probably have more of a free hand to engage in torture, assassinations, political meddling, and so forth, but on the other hand, their activities will be subjected to greater scrutiny. There’s a risk they might even be prosecuted in the future, if something goes terribly wrong.
The article (thank you Si1ver1ock) also provides the first reasonable attempt I’ve seen to define the Deep State:
This is a definition that many should find compelling and that should go a long way toward removing the insinuating taint of “conspiracy” – a word with an actual applicable definition – often used to distract from significant factual arguments wrt the group of people/agencies the term is often used to globally reference.
Sometimes people confuse “conspiracy” with analysis of interests — a perfectly valid way to infer why groups of people behave the way they do.
Maybe a revamped CIA,voided of zionist traitors,will emerge from Trump,one that works for US instead of zion.
The current edition hates him,why would he work with them?
Think hard,and leave your prejudices aside,and you might find out different answers.
like the TAX EVASION COMPLEX
Pay no attention to the men behind the Iron Net.
On the relevance of declassifying, let’s try to predict the possible outcome.
Actual subjects of this media conflict seem to be two opposing sides. On one hand we have NYT and WaPo with their allegations from unnamed sources on the other is the president-elect. Legitimity of the leaks is not disputed but their significance is viewed as an attack on the state.
Let’s assume government produces indeniable evidence third country special services provided hacked info to the Wikileaks due to their own motives. Does that hurt that country in any substantial way? Obviously not.
Wikileaks and media citing it’s leaks will be to blame. Ultimate goal – enhancing cybersecurity (classes for the elderly on how not to visit phishing sites), why just not to do that nevertheless? 2nd possible goal – reelection with dems providing candidate other than HRC (her reputation’s already damaged, so noone is arguing she’s a downed pilot).
Now ask youselves would reelection be the healthy choice, as it’ll nail 2 landmarks: 1st mild color revolution will happen in the US (beforehand only succeeded in small politically weak countries), and onslaught on the watchdog duty of the press and it’s ethical obligation to protect it’s sources.
No matter what outcome reelection process would reach, it will signify major political crisis a, and free speech crisis b, as for from now on any media in the world publishing material that can possibly be classified as damaging to the democracy will be legally and illegaly bashed in one or other way “to protect the republic”.
That’s a lot of wishful thinking, but if really this “iron curtain” scenario is possible, no media identity in their right mind would put this scandal as some existential question, because, frankly, it’s a no-brainer.
un-named sources?
This is a scam when a news agency makes claims that are something other than whistle blowing against an American institution. Reason? It fakes power. In a gov of by and for the people, the people OWN the information relevant to their well being provided that information is about the nation itself, as open source as it should be.
Implicating information about another country is NOT AN OPEN SOURCE ISSUE – it is a relationship issue which should be made public as IT IS NOT A WHISTLE BLOWER ISSUE.
The con job the US media is perpetrating upon America like WMD is a criminal fraud and should be prosecuted as such.
Want to see what REAL and malicious interference by a hostile state into another country’s internal politics looks like? Check this one out. Hmmm…
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html
Love it! “Here is our offer at The Intercept: If anyone has solid proof that Russia interfered with U.S. elections, send it to us via secure drop and we will verify its legitimacy and publish it.”
Personally, I think it’s probably a given that hackers from many countries could easily have gotten the Pedesta emails and hacked the DNC.
U.S. politicians should do want U.S. citizens have learned to do since the Snowden revelations — assume that anything they put out via electronic communication has the potential to be hacked and not put anything in electronic writing that one wouldn’t want seen by others.
I don’t really care if it was Russia or someone else, because I recognize that’s the way things work today thanks to Mr. Snowden.
Whoever did it, I was glad to be able to see the dots connected from foreign money going to the Clinton Foundations, to arms sold to those countries, to the arms ending up in the hands of ISIL, to U.S. personnel being unable to be defended from the Benghazi attacks, to Clinton’s lying about a YouTube video causing it, to Clinton’s lying about telling the Benghazi mother that a video caused it, to lying to the public about lying to the mother.
I don’t hold these views because I am pro-Russia or a Trump supporter. I did not vote for Mr. Trump, nor did I vote for Mrs. Clinton. My personal belief is that Mr. Obama’s true legacy as president is to shoot messengers of problems in gov’t while shielding the gov’t problem causers from responsibility.
This hunt for who caused the WikiLeaks while ignoring the valuable information in them that the public needed to know about Clinton, is a prime example of that twisted sense of right and wrong; and the above the law mentality that has plagued the Obama years.
It’s dangerous policy to retaliate against whistleblowers of gov’t fraud, waste and abuse. Yet this has been the unwritten policy in many areas of U.S. gov’t under the Obama administration.
Good for you Sharon. And thanks for sharin’!
It’s funny how the same Clinton Cultists who were ‘reasonably’ stating that the Demo Party is a PRIVATE enterprise and therefore Hillary’s rigging the primary was nobody else’s business are now demanding that the US government goes to war with Russia over Russia allegedly hacking Hillary’s irresponsible mishandling of government property (diverting secret stuff into her unprotected server), the hacking of pervert Podesta’s Gmail account (lol) and the penetration of improperly protected DNC’s – a PRIVATE organization, remember? – servers.
Yeah, a nuke exchange with Russia is clearly needed to fix this.
Maybe Hillary has a sexual dysfunction. Couldn’t satisfy her husband? Frigid? Only gets satisfaction from blood and war. Screws everything up so as to create chaos for blood and war. Sounds like a modern day vampire.
Did they really say that? That’s straight out of the old Jim Crow days, when South Carolina turned the presidential primaries over to the parties to run. (A move which helped George W. Bush steal the election in 2000 from John McCain*, and one which other states copied not long after…even before the gutting of the VRA.)
* I’m seriously thinking of an article comparing actions of the Clinton campaign and their allies against Sanders in 2016 with actions of the Bush campaign against McCain in 2000. Want me to submit it?
My two cents as a foreigner, not Russian, neither British.
This whole whining about Russia’s interference is damaging Us intelligence reputation in an unprecedented way.
We all know that US also spies on Russia and other countries, so no big story here. Even if Russia has done that, to make this public accusations on them is ridiculous. Even if you come up with real evidence (and so far I hear and read a lot of loose theories but no substance), so what? new sanctions on Russia because their Intelligence agencies managed to do something the US ones only dream of?
And is Obama aware that this whole story is turning DNC and CIA into the world laughing joke?
You have interference from another country which, by the way, has a military budget 1/8 of USA but somehow manages to look so much more powerful than their richer ‘adversaries’? Then find out where the problem is, work to fix it and stop whining publicly, CIA and Brothers!.
Nah. US intelligence has never had a favorable reputation.
From terrible to worse is always an option, and doesn’t include favorable.
You hit the nail in the head Fabrizio. As a Brazilian, I know very well how the USA meddles with other countries governments and politics. 24 years of brutal dictatorship financed and backed by the Americans.
Two years ago we all read how the USA government was spying on Dilma Roussef and even Merkel.
The USA government is nothing more than the dirty machine which works for the benefit of North American corporations. But the comon American, the people on the streets, will believe anything they say, specially if backed by the disgusting media like NYT and Wash. Post.
There’s probably nothing to declassify.
All this Russian scaremongering is, of course, FAKE NEWS, lol.
I agree with many of the comments below. What is this website about anyway? There really is no “real news” here just hysterical bloviation.
This website has no “persona” no “point of view” (except hysteria) no philosophy (except making money for its editors and owner) it just blasts out baloney.
Articles, such as this one, are repeated over and over – the editors, a tiny group of establishment and establishment funded white men once again have exclusive possession of THE TRUTH.
To point out my contention, see this article written by retired inelegance professionals which suggests that the Intercept’s view is just plain…well, hysterical. The Intercept is little more than a collection of articles scattered around with no central organization no direction and very little help to anyone’s understanding of the world.
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/
The article does not even consider that no evidence (other than circumstantial) exists of Russian hacking. Do the author or editors think the US is going to admit it has no evidence? Do the author or the editors believe – after everything that it and others have published – that the NSA does not have the ability to provide real evidence of this hacking…if there is any evidence at all?
The Intercept is just another Neoliberal establishment outlet, if it has any overarching principal it is to support the established order of which it are a part.
I have removed my bookmark of this page and only visit occasionally to verify my view that The Intercept is “full of sound and fury signifying nothing” the hysterical blovations of white malcontents.
The article does not even consider that no evidence (other than circumstantial) exists of Russian hacking.
First paragraph of the article:
Bogus.
Having read some of the below comments, I do agree that the title of this article “OBAMA MUST DECLASSIFY EVIDENCE OF RUSSIAN HACKING” sounds presumptive; however, the way I interpret it, I think what the authors are actually trying to do, is pose a direct challenge to Obama and the “Democratic” establishment, to declassify this evidence, which in all likelihood doesn’t even exist.
I know what some of you may be thinking – documents can probably be forged by the requisite agencies (e.g. CIA), and done so, in order to try to validate or vindicate such claims, with maybe some assistance from CIA plants in Russia (to ensure that cross-checking the fabricated documents doesn’t reveal any inconsistencies). I’m not an expert on all the machinations of spy/intelligence agencies, but I’m also certainly not ruling out this possibility, either.
In the end, though I think it is unlikely that this will happen. Oftentimes, the cover-up tends to be worse than the actual crime. If such an operation were exposed, the CIA would lose any shred of credibility it may have left.
exactly. Show me your WMD.
and btw – this is what the dumb&dumbers like Barack get for not prosecuting war criminals like kissinger, cheney, bush, cia etc. wolf! wolf!
I will be the first to concede that the US has a long sorted history of interfering in the internal affairs of other sovereign nation. That having been said, the issue as to whether Putin has been directly attempting to shape the outcome of US elections is best weighed on a balanced scale. To this end, it is incumbent upon the accuser to prevent VERIFIABLE evidence in support of its claim. This does not simply mean that the intelligence committee weighs intelligence claims with an eye to issuing yet another skewed assessment to advance a pre-ordained political agenda. Neither does it mean that the POTUS should be afforded the opportunity to use the weight of his office to lend an air of legitimacy to baseless charges.
On the issue of the POTUS using his power to declassify intelligence documents that purportedly lend credence to the claim that the Russian government is directly responsible for hacking the computers of Hillary Clinton, Podesta, and the DNC, we are simply entering a wilderness of mirrors. In observing the theatrical drama of president Obama et al watching in real time the purported assassination of Osama bin Laden by a Navy seal team, I was stunned when it was subsequently announced in the days that followed that every Seal helm camera simultaneously failed (WTF!!!). So, too, I was shocked to learn that the alleged body of bin Laden had been simply dumped in the ocean after the Seal team reportedly went to the trouble of recovering it in the first place. And then there was the claim that the US Government had positively identified the DNA of the corpse as that of Osama bin Laden although it was never adequately explained how they acquired the original sample of bin Laden’s DNA that would have been necessary for comparison sake. For that matter, absent the necessary confirmation that the person they were attempting to assassinate was actually Osama bin Laden, upon what basis did the justification for the deadly assault on the Islamabad compound rely? And of course there was the ever evolving political narrative that surrounded the Islamabad operation itself wherein the press would ignore glaring contradictions from earlier accounts to dutifully report the latest bullshit oozing out of the Oval office. And lastly, there was the fate of the Navy Seal teem itself who met a collective deadly fate just months later in a remote area of Afghanistan (dead men tell no tales). Yet the so-called alternative media also failed to satisfy logic by simply focusing on the assumed power of the POTUS to conduct political assassinations at its discretion. Oh sure, we can rely on the POTUS to provide us with credible evidence that originates from within the intelligence community.
busy as i am, didnt know a lot of that. thanks for posting! too many co-incidences point to a different truth.
fyi
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/736223/9-11-tower-Building-7-collapse-fire-conspiracy
even the blind should be able to see the picture by now.
Inspired typo of the week:
To this end, it is incumbent upon the accuser to prevent VERIFIABLE evidence in support of its claim.
I believe you meant to type present, and I agree with that, as well as the rest of the sentiment expressed in that paragraph. But I really think your inspired typo may be what we get instead. :-s
Yes, except that I was apparently lacking the present mindedness to do so. Thanks for pointing that out.
No worries. I actually think you were probably subconsciously channeling what’s most likely to happen. In which case, way to let your inner 8-ball fly! ;-}
Will that is a nice trf to find a bloowwer,……
While looking for it here is an link from a Canadian Author about the MSM lies in Syria
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec6_1481541479
NYT: Mr. Flynn: “he believed that the Central Intelligence Agency had become a political tool of the Obama administration “. Right or wrong, that has less importance than the fact this whole story has to the whole country. If there really should be people acting for a “colored revolution” in the US this people must drink a lot of champain this days!
you can start with publishing sources and methods provided by snowden
It appears that since Vice News banned comments, The Intercept has become the de facto playground for propagandists, trolls, and what’s left of the sincere commenter.
The “mainstream” press is hard at work reviving the Red Menace rather than accepting the fact that they misread the electorate. Even if the Russians did this, I’m not convinced it was what led the Rust Belt to abandon the Democratic Party. But it will quickly become part of the historical narrative of the 2016 Election which can only serve to frustrate substantive progress in this country. It’s very much appreciated that there are some cooler heads that require more substantive proof than “trust us”. If these allegations are true, I hope to see some definitive proof, but I’m not holding my breath.
This is all Jeremy Scahil has to say?
What’s going on with intercept? Is intercept really a counter revolutionary tactic? He was the star of his Dick Tracey film. Not the tough guy he liked to think he is! Doesn’t stand up to the portrayed image!
Makes me fear the worst that Snowden too is in on it. Hope I’m wrong. This is shite! Pure shite!
The intercept has been a joke. No real need here either!
No REAL NEWS here either!
They say the goal of the Russians was “to sow public distrust in the upcoming presidential election.” If that were true, why in the hell would our government make it public and sow public mistrust in the upcoming presidential election?
The title of the article assumes that
There is evidence
That must be declassified
By Obama
But the joke of course is, that there is no evidence!
I often feel critical of the headline writers here, whoever they are.
This one should have been “Yo, Obama, show it or shove it!”
Or maybe, onsidering the skeptical tone, Intercept writers Scahill and Shwartz taunt: “I got your CIA evidence right here, buddy!”
Misspelled Schwarz, sorry.
Hey ,, I like it with the ” T”
Willem ,
Son , in this world of spin and re-spin it ain’t how you play the game, as long as you treat life as a game.
That’s one way to perceive one’s existence ,, i.e. , a matter of chance .
But then again , there is this feeling ,,,, feeling what ? This longing for completion . You go from tit to grave without an answer ,, there is no mercy .
Only Gerts and Monas ,, that’s what I get .
Original title
.
‘Obama must
Declassify
Evidence of
Russian Hacking’
.
In a similar vein
.
‘Obama must
Declassify
Evidence of
Extraterrestrial life’
.
And
.
‘Obama must
Declassify
Evidence that
Politicians are Reptiles’
.
And
.
‘Obama must
Declassify
Evidence that
We Never Went to the Moon’
.
Etc
The Nig-A was perhaps the biggest second disappointment in my 78 years of life . He’s right up there with my first ex-wife Carole !! She’s Siciliana , so please , I beg ,, tongues tied .
And yes ,, I am colored ,,,,, as they say from Louisiana , kinda creole .
Dear Willem ( what’s with that name ? ) ,
The only thing we have is our 5 senses . Last count they were :
1—-VISION ——-About 87% of our input
2—-HEARING —About 7% of our input
3—-TOUCH——–About 3% of our input
4—-SMELL——– About 1%
5 —TASTE ———About 1%
and the last 1% is what evolution is all about .
Then the Intercept is taking exactly the correct position in demanding that evidence be provided. Both sides should be demanding that evidence be provided precisely because politics is partisan. The CIA had an obligation to either not release it’s suspicions or be prepared to prove them. Publishing a conclusion on something so political without supporting evidence is irresponsible. That quote was spot on. The one thing I know for sure is that Willem doesn’t know and should not definitively say one way or the other, but instead demand proof like the author has.
Great article.
I read the headline as less of a concession, and more of a challenge or questioning demand that Obama, now that the U.S. government has concluded there was indeed Russian interference of some sort, release the facts that show it, if they actually exist. In other words, put up or shut up.
Has anyone heard any news about the recount? I mean the count. It really doesn’t matter if Russia interfered with our election, if our own corporate overlawyers beat them to the punch. Most likely all these stories will eventually be forgotten, some sooner than others, like the Panama papers.
Lay your money on Tippy Toes in the Fifth at Hialeah !!
No recount. There was one that worked out, but it apparently changed no results. If you want to question the results of the General Election of the USA, simply because untrustworthy processes were involved in their calculation, the cost is prohibitive – plus the legal establishment doesn’t seem to like the idea of being second guessed about it. Most wealthy Western countries have a paper ballot system, quite easily verified, but we’re stuck with this “just trust us” one, which is in itself suspicious if you ask me.
Here’s the count :
Dmocractic Primary :
Hillary Clinton——-Da Winnah —Debbie Wasserman Shultz –Da Bitch
Bernie Sanders—–Da Loser—-I’m taking this to the floor !
Republican Primary :
Trump—-I’m White ,, and proud of it .
Results :
Da Winnah is Donald ( White Trash ) Trump !
but maybe White Trash is better than White Pimps ,,,,, Say What ?
Is there an interpreter with you?
Yeah . His name is :
Lawrence ( Yogi ) Berra .
Mudbone seems to be following in the tradition of several other commenters who’ve historically found a home beneath writing done by Greenwald at other venues.
Whether or not he rises to the levels represented by the following remains to be seen, but there have always been folks who’ve appreciated the challenges inherent to the task of translating, and there has often been wisdom or, at least, great hilarity, that was worthy of the search, so…..here are the others who I – and maybe others – have found worthy:
Art James – who had many worthy names in various comment sections, but whose value as an anti-war commenter got overwhelmed by his, at times, overenthusiastic commenting.
The Minkoffs – a trio of relatives, two sisters and a cousin, whose mangled English often contained words of wisdom, if one had the skill and patience to try to finagle it out.
j spicoli (here at TI), but who has been a longtime commenter known elsewhere as the donger and other equally interesting names.
These are just the first to come to mind. I’m sure other longtime readers will be able to come up with others whom I should recall but don’t at the moment.
art guerilla is in that genre
Yes! Very much so!
Thank you for the reminder. Would have been a terrible omission. :-)
The recount in Wisconsin just ended;Trump got 111? more votes.
Yes, we need evidence of Russian interference with the US election declassified. But, given Obama’s aversion to openness, it seems unlikely the information will reveal much about the interference or how it may have affected the election.
The US has increasingly adopted a system that ensures its elected representatives are selected by the highest bidders. It is ironic people would object to possible influence by a foreign country given the damage the US has done to undermine its own democratic processes and elections.
In the US system, people seem surprised Exxon’s CEO is the leading candidate for Secretary of State. This is an opportunity for Exxon to set policy rather than be subservient to elected officials who serve interests other than Exxon’s interests. Exxon and Russia now have an opportunity to benefit from exploiting vast oil and gas resources in Russia. By going direct to Russia through the State Department, Exxon has simply eliminated the middle man.
Seems a bit of a corporatist choice to me, you know, Exxon and all. A lot like the Goldman Sachs dude. Very damn corporatist sort of pick, really. One might even call them establishment rather than Russian stooges.
Better a non aligned non partisan American businessman than a shitehead full of zio BS,like the HB,Kerry,Albright etc etc etc.
Exxon will sell Russian oil,and maybe less ME oil.Who does that benefit?The GS headchoppers?Nein.
Sam December 13 2016, 12:26 a.m.
I find this whole thing highly implausible.
______________________________________________
I find the comments most entertaining . I no longer read the BS article .
To each their own,, and may the good Mother AMERICA let you be !
The progressive left crows and giggles while whistleblowers risk life and liberty. Assange’s and Manning’s and Hastings’s selfless work wasted on Occupiers and Greens and Democratic Socialists and other thoughtless obots.
What? Do you realize that us lefties, real lefties, not DNC lefties are on the side of the Greenwald’s, the Assange’s the Manning’s, the Hasting’s and the Snowden’s? Your partisanship is interfering with your objectivity.
Might I point out that Jill Stein got 1% of the vote?????
It’s like the left in Israel,600 people.(proportionally)
Show me a non zionist,leftist,socialist,democratic,peace loving nationalist,and I’d vote for him in a second.
The closest we had to that,believe it or not,was Donald Trump,as post election events have shown.
Will he deliver?Can he defeat the serial liars?Can he restore sanity to America?
Can he neuter Israeli Occupied Territory?(Congress)
Break out the flavored pretzels,(honey mustard with onion please)this will be interesting.
CIA’s Russia hacking claims dismissed as ‘bulls***’ by former UK ambassador Craig Murray
‘I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack’
Belfast Telegraph
I find this whole thing highly implausible. Why would Russians hack emails from the DNC and John Podesta? After all, we’ve repeatedly been told that these emails are mundane communications that only reveal the routine nuts and bolts of political campaigns. The Russians would be more likely to hack and release something unambiguously damaging, like Clinton’s deleted emails. The whole thing is laughable on many fronts, and the fact that is taken at all seriously shows how in thrall Americans are to to the deep state, no matter how critical and skeptical they may see themselves as being.
We’re repeatedly told by the Clinton camp (and there is little to no pushback on this cognitive dissonance from the Republican establishment) that these emails are “mundane communications that only reveal the routine nuts and bolts of political campaigns” AND that their release was of such magnitude that it affected Clinton’s election results so poorly that it qualifies as an unfair intervention. Only one of these can actually be true. Personally that’s what I find most laughable, closely followed by the goofy acceptance by Trump’s supporters of Trump’s very establishment “anti-establishment” cabinet.
But the humor is dark these days. Dark as hell.
Trump never said his cabinet would be iconoclastic. Never said he’d be making Cynthia McKinney a diplomat, or Ron Paul a Treasury Sec.
Americans were told they wouldn’t be lefties.
Yes, any excuse in a storm, I know all about it. You’re as bad as the Clintonistas with this lame talk.
Nice! Well said. Too bad Jeremy Scahil isn’t half the journalist that you are! Intercept is a big let down!
Scahil has an image problem! It distracts from any journalistic talents he may have!
They should hire some people from the comments section to actually do some real work!
Podesta’s account was so insecure that even a password-guessing beginner could have hacked it. Yes, Russia had more interest in the unreleased State Dept. emails (to use for intelligence, not public politics). The Russian approach to get them would have been to offer Weiner a tryst with Anna Chapman.
This election does not fit the coordinates of reason, it is at least Bushx2, whenever this happens prepare for war as per fossil-fuel lobby controlled national and foreign policy: for the aforesaid can do no other.
During the Trevor Noah interview Obama (while offering no more evidence that the Russians ‘meddled’ in the election than Bush offered that Itaq had WMDs minutes from launch) posed the question ‘how did America come to the state where these things could play such a role in the outcome?’ He proposed some reasons, but here’s my list:
1) Decades of both parties pretending basically baseless accusations are factual, and fact based accusations baseless.
2) Decades of both parties punishing media (outlets or individuals) who tried to make important issues that neither party saw advantage in important election issues.
3) Decades (actually, centuries) of both parties and the media (and the entertainment industry) pretending that an issue wasn’t settled until the parties agreed it was, at which point every nation that hadn’t got to the point of settling on the same answer became ‘backwards/uncivilized’ but never acknowledging how late in the game the US joined the ‘modern/civilized’ consensus.
4) Decades of both parties rewarding media (outlets or individuals) for pretending ‘how many angels can dance on the head of a pin’ type disputes are important election issues.
5) Decades of both parties playing the politics of fear, and rewarding media that played along.
6) Decades of prioritizing ever smaller groups of voters in ever smaller locations.
I’m sure other people will come up with further contributing factors, and/or dispute that some of what I listed played a role, so please, chime in.
Jeremy Scahill – Can you publish this letter.
“In an angry letter sent to ODNI chief Clapper on Monday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said he was “dismayed” that the top U.S. intelligence official had not informed the panel of the CIA’s analysis and the difference between its judgment and the FBI’s assessment.
Noting that Clapper in November testified that intelligence agencies lacked strong evidence linking Russian cyber attacks to the WikiLeaks disclosures, Nunes asked that Clapper, together with CIA and FBI counterparts, brief the panel by Friday on the latest intelligence assessment of Russian hacking during the election campaign.”
Here is Devin Nunes’ letter. Why don’t you publish it on the Intercept. So far its the only written documentary source on the whole Russian hacking false claim.
Well, I personally think ol’ George was just hoping people would forget how 5 years before that in 1791 he took U.S. troops against farmer citizens to collect a whiskey tax t pay for war debt, sparking a “tiny [second] revolution.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion
Also, don’t be too surprised when WaPo publishes list with The Intercept on it this time, perhaps inspired by Carl Reiner’s Dead Men Don’t Wear Plaid, titled “Friends of Vladimir.” Ya bunch o’ danged Russkies. ;^)>
I wish The Intercept had taken the more neutral position of not treating this as a crisis before it was warranted. By trying to appease/co-opt liberals in their outrage while demanding evidence, the tone taken here instead validates that outrage while precluding the more rational and preliminary stance of weighing the evidence and challenging the big picture, not to mention the assumptions that link the MSM narrative together.
That’s a very good point. The headline assumes there is evidence of Russian hacking, when all we have at the moment is mere fake WaPo news.
Mr. Scahill and Mr. Schwarz
“……….It’s also the case that the U.S. has a long history of interfering in other countries’ elections, and far worse: The U.S. has overthrown democratically elected governments the world over. In fact, in 2006 Hillary Clinton herself criticized the George W. Bush administration for not doing “something to determine who was going to win” in Palestinian elections. It would not be shocking in the least if Russia sought to interfere in the U.S. electoral process…….”
This is completely irrelevant to the reasons that Russia hacked the DNC. Putin is practical (realpolitik). He is not interested in what the US did in Iran in 1953 (over one-half of a century ago). Russia has a long of a history of interference in the affairs of other countries (just as the US) especially in their current “sphere of influence” – an idea which supposedly died after the cold war. However, that continues today in eastern Europe. Putin did not appreciate what he considered US interfering in Russia’s area of influence in Georgia or Ukraine in 2004 and 2010, respectively. The ex KGB agent opposed the march of NATO to his doorstep after the collapse of the USSR. He doesn’t appreciate US support for the rebels in his extended area of influence in Syria. These are all in Russia’s “sphere of influence”.
Greenwald quotes As’ad AbuKhalil:
“…….This is what imperialism is all about: to give yourself the right to intervene in faraway places and to project power in every corner of the globe, including the arctic, and to disregard world public opinion. Imperialism is to have the temerity to lecture and hector Russia about the evils of intervention in the affairs of its neighbor, Ukraine, where the U.S. and EU are blatantly conspiring against Russian interests there………”
Former Intercept staff journalist, Marcy Wheeler pointedly writes (care of Mona; “Why Is CIA Avoiding the Conclusion that Putin Hacked Hillary to Retaliate for Its Covert Actions?” https://www.emptywheel.net/?p=56493):
“……..The most logical explanation for the parade of leaks since Friday about why Russia hacked the Democrats is that the CIA has been avoiding admitting — perhaps even considering — the conclusion that Russia hacked Hillary in retaliation for the covert actions the CIA itself has taken against Russian interests……. The likelihood that Russia targeted the former Secretary of State for a series of covert actions, all impacting key Russian interests …….”
Wheeler and As’ad AbuKhalil apparently recognize a magical force field around certain countries that effectively belong to Russia (therefore, the US is at fault). They are off limits because of Russian interests. This is pretty typical of the far left which believes that the US staged a coup of the Russian puppet government in Ukraine. Russia is currently supporting and conducting a war in Ukraine because of the loss of Ukraine to the west. The US meddled in a considerable amount of countries in South America. Do these countries belong in the US sphere of influence today?
This provides an important motivation for the hack of the DNC by the Russian government. Trump and HRC hold diametrically opposite positions on relations with Russia suggesting that Russia also worked to elect Trump (although it could have certainly been revenge directed at Hillary). However, it is not a justification for the hack since the US (as far as I know) has not interfered in a Russian pseudo-election. The idea that countries are in someone’s sphere of influence is unfortunate. An area of influence obviously limits freedom and democracy which is why Ukrainians rebelled in the first place.
You are way off target if you think the “far left” believes wrongly that the US staged a coup in Ukraine. Nuland in her own words: https://youtu.be/KIvRljAaNgg
No, Craig. All countries are off-limits, independently of Russian interests.
Not exactly, but not for lack of trying. Latin America is considered a “lost” region to US neolibs/neocons, meaning: It was ours. Reaproachment with Cuba is Obama’s way of trying to regain some influence in Latin America.
It’s notable that the period of greatest growth in Latin American history occurred after the IMF and the US were mostly kicked out.
“……..No, Craig. All countries are off-limits, independently of Russian interests…….”
You are going to need to start explaining that to the Greenwalds of the world that continue to refer to countries like Ukraine as within a sphere of “Russian interests”.
“…….Not exactly, but not for lack of trying. Latin America is considered a “lost” region to US neolibs/neocons, meaning: It was ours……..”
Notice how that worked out for the US, but in Ukraine – which Russia has dominated for decades – it was a US coup. Whereas South Americans are smart enough to reject US domination, Ukrainians apparently enjoy the Russians running their affairs. I should qualify that. Only the Ukrainian Nazis reject Russia.
The so called left is under assault throughout Latin America,from Argentina.to Brazil to Venezuela.
prezzie o’bee has turned out to be a coward and a phony who only pretends to care for America. He wants the people who risk their lives to preserve ownership and transparency of by and for the people, like Mr. Snowden and Chelsea Manning to spend the rest of their lives in prison. Maybe O’bee has S&M sessions with his wife, mayne he likes getting spanked or whipped for being a bad boy, or maybe he likes Michelle to waterboard him.
He could have done this long ago. He could have fired the imbecile in the CIA. Truth is, O’bee is just another pimped out for wallstreet.
New Cold War threat inflation (well worth a gander):
The New Red Scare –
http://harpers.org/archive/2016/12/the-new-red-scare/2/
Yikes. I knew the dumb&dumbers were incompetent but had no idea it was this bad.
3rd World USA
So,,, Gert ,,, like I would sure like to meet Mona . Is she a fox ,, is she a horse , is she a dog ? Geez ,, Man ,,, sure hope she’s a dog cause I’m a dog man .
Had nine years with Willy ( my dog ) , best part of my life . We cooked steaks on Sundays , course I could not get his steak into his dish without locking him into the bedroom . He was a wild one ,, Will inhaled his stake and then set bye hoping for a piece of mine . He got half of mine ,, but it made me feel alright . Then we would take our walk , and Willy off the leash , full belly , was a thing of beauty . I knew those were my days .
We’d come back home ,, take a nap ,, and wait for Monday .
Willy sounds like my 25 lb cat Angus.He won’t leash walk though.
Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking – sources
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E
Here’s a breakdown of this Reuters piece.
Source – three American officials who declined to be named.
ODNI spokesman declined to comment.
“In October, the U.S. government formally accused Russia of a campaign of cyber attacks against American political organizations ahead of the Nov. 8 presidential election. Democratic President Barack Obama has said he warned Russian President Vladimir Putin about consequences for the attacks.” – Source?
“Obama last week ordered intelligence agencies to review the cyber attacks and foreign intervention in the presidential election and to deliver a report before he turns power over to Trump on Jan. 20.” – Source?
An unnamed senior U.S. official told Reuters ???
“In an angry letter sent to ODNI chief Clapper on Monday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said he was “dismayed” that the top U.S. intelligence official had not informed the panel of the CIA’s analysis and the difference between its judgment and the FBI’s assessment.
Noting that Clapper in November testified that intelligence agencies lacked strong evidence linking Russian cyber attacks to the WikiLeaks disclosures, Nunes asked that Clapper, together with CIA and FBI counterparts, brief the panel by Friday on the latest intelligence assessment of Russian hacking during the election campaign.”
Now finally a real source. Can we see this letter. This letter contradicts the WaPo story directly and points to the WaPo story being fake news published with the intent to launch a coup in the USA.
WAPO, now a zionist propaganda rag, will slowly slide into chapter 11 where they can explain to their creditors how they will be able to lie their way back to profitability.
This is a fascinating article on the subject:
http://harpers.org/archive/2016/12/the-new-red-scare/
Excerpt:
“It’s almost impossible to confirm attribution in cyberspace.” For example, a tool developed by the Chinese to attack Google in 2009 was later reused by the so-called Equation Group against officials of the Afghan government. So the Afghans, had they investigated, might have assumed they were being hacked by the Chinese. Thanks to a leak by Edward Snowden, however, it now appears that the Equation Group was in fact the NSA.
Bill Binney, the former technical director of the NSA, shares Carr’s skepticism about the Russian attribution.”
Reuters: Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking
From Maisie’s link:
I will make a prediction: no one will send in “solid proof” that Russia interfered in the U.S. elections. Julian Assange and Craig Murray have already made clear that the Clinton campaign e-mails that Wikileaks published were not hacked, they were leaked by an insider. Murray even writes that he has met that individual, and it is not a Russian.
This does not mean that Russia has not been spying on our recent election. They spy on us, just as we spy on them, and that has been going on for a long time. But that by itself is not interference. Indeed, if Russia was caught trying to manipulate the outcome of a U.S. election, the consequences for them could be very serious and possibly harmful. I doubt that Putin would risk such a thing–he has shown himself to be both canny and cautious in protecting Russia’s interests. Our ruling establishment, however, contains a right wing–the neo-cons–that verges on batshit crazy, and could well try to set up Russia as a fall guy for political reasons. And, as we know from the leadup to the 2003 Iraq war, the CIA can be used to aid and abet this kind of stuff.
” Assange and Craig Murray say that HRC campaign emails were not hacked “. Gospel of truth ?
Any Intelligence operative worth his weight in salt would use a credible, third party proxy to hack and release documents obtained from the DNC, Podesta, Hillary etc for the purpose of establishing plausible deniability. There is even the possibility that US intelligence agencies allowed detectable hacks to go unabated for the purpose of advancing their own interests.
Can someone tell Mona the troll what fake news means. She’s waiting for Glenn Greenwald to tell her.
see https://theintercept.com/2016/12/10/anonymous-leaks-to-the-washpost-about-the-cias-russia-beliefs-are-no-substitute-for-evidence/?comments=1#comments
Nice comment, that’s what I’ve been thinking myself.
Can U say Honduras ?
Carl Weetabix ? Mudbone
December 12 2016, 9:05 p.m.
Unless you’re black, please, don’t use the N-word. Really it just isn’t cool and can’t be made cool. Even if I get your point, it just sounds racist…
? Reply
Mudbone ? Carl Weetabix
December 12 2016, 10:03 p.m.
My maternal grandfather , Octave Rouge , had the Black gene ,, Front& Center . I was born on Cane River about ten miles NW of Slidell , January 15 , 1939 . Granpa was the sheriff and he had family , and he wore his guns slung low .
All you fancy city people don’t know shit from shinola .
And Yes , I do know the difference between being Black and being a Nig–A !
It like being Martin&Ali , or being Clarence Thomas&Barack Obama !!
Don’t you come at me with that Black&White shit ,,, Boy !!!
BTW : BEE–CCNY 1961 , MS–1967 ( Math ) , Phd-1973( Physics)–NYU
Don’t ” F ” around with me pal ,, I got The Blood in me !!
BTW : A bit of Cherokee too !
LOL. Told! Dude’s name is “Mudbone” and ya’ll assume he’s white?! I love it when white people try to tell off people for using the “N-word”. Nice rant, Mud.
Never use the word myself.Its just a demeaning slur,at least when whitey(me)uses it.
Funny,my 2yo grandson’s black father calls him it when he comes home from work,obviously as an endearment.
Could Massive Russian Oil Deal with Exxon Explain Why Putin Appears to Have Meddled in US Election?
https://www.democracynow.org/2016/12/12/could_massive_russian_oil_deal_with
But between Tillerson, and Sessions, and Bannon, and Pruitt, and…, um, he’s really a liberal. A confused, unnerved, dejected, progressive left said so.
The flaw in this thesis is that it doesn’t give Russia or Putin a motive to support Trump. Remember that Russia/Putin have been working to reduce the amount of oil being pumped in the world, and has ordered the reduction in the amount pumped by Russia. Also remember that the Russians have their own oil company that is larger than Exxon, and the government gets not only the revenue generated from the taxes/fees per barrel it pumps, but also a cut of the profits from the sales when the Russian oil giant is the one pumping, which is more than it gets if Exxon is the one doing the pumping.
However, Exxon itself does get a second motive for ‘meddling’ in the election to put climate change denying Trump in the White House rather than climate change aware Clinton. Those leases would be valued at a discount as long as the sanctions are in place.
I am a bit surprised at your assertion that Russia or Putin have nothing to gain.
You don’t do business in Russia without rewarding Putin.
Exxon Mobil makes multiple billions?
Russia and Putin make out.
or else it doesn’t happen.
one example
All Putin’s Men: Secret Records Reveal Money Network Tied to Russian Leader
https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160403-putin-russia-offshore-network.html
Interesting that you took my argument that Putin/Russia stood to gain a lot less than Exxon and twisted it as somehow being that Putin/Russia stood nothing to gain.
And then, somehow, conclude that Exxon pumping Russian oil and making a profit for the shareholders and executives of Exxon puts more money in Putin/Russian hands than the Russian state owned company pumping Russian oil, and making a profit for the Russian shareholders (the state) and Russian executives (who would, in the universe where Putin controls such things, be Putin cronies)
It’s rather as if I’d written 3>2 and 10%+10%>10% and you replied that I had argued 3<2 and then argued that a 10 % cut was more profitable than a 20% cut.
Interesting that you overlook the broader motive in favorable relations sweetened by an ExxonMobil deal: sanctions lifted, losses staunched, trade and business opportunities open.
To be aware and still not care. The queen of fracking has spoken.
Donald Trump To Name Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, to Secretary Of State
Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, has ties to Russia.
What is it that super smaarht prosecuting attorneys look for?
Motive, Means, Moment.
“Russia has nothing to gain”
“Trump, Exxon Mobil, Tillerson and Russia have nothing to gain”
…. hmmm.
that line of thinking will be revised by some super schmaart geeniusses.
I know!
Whatabouttery!
and a bag load of ad hom!
Yes!
…noise to follow
McCain has always been paranoid about Russia and China. I’m pretty sure Exxon did business with many countries other than Russia.
Fired Trump Adviser Tells Moscow Audience How Great Exxon CEO Would Be For Russia
Carter Page, kicked off the campaign because of his ties to Russia, says he’s “personally excited” about the likely secretary of State pick.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rex-tillerson-secretary-state-russia-carter-page_us_584f70ede4b0bd9c3dfe7991
Good ol divide and conquer from the zionists at Dnow.Man,do they suck or what?
“The only path forward that makes sense is for Obama to order the release of as much evidence as possible underlying the reported “high confidence” of U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia both intervened in the election and did so with the intention of aiding Trump’s candidacy.”
You are jumping the gun.
The first step is for Obama’s administration to tell us in an official unambiguous and attributed statement that Russia did “intervene” in the election and did so to help Trump.
You are also twisting open the issue.
So far the claim has been that Russia hacked the DNC and Podesta and gave the hacked emails to wikileaks.
You are going much further and saying Russia intervened in the election. Now what does intervening in an election mean. If Putin made a statement that he preferred Trump to Hillary, is that intervening?
Or does intervening mean that the ballot was rigged? Or something in between?
We all know Putin preferred Trump. The American public knew that and voted for Trump because they preferred Trump’s Russia policy to Clinton”s.
As I have pointed out, all we have is a WaPo story telling us what some unknown people said to them. Why should we believe WaPo?
Unless the CIA or the White House issues an official statement, the WaPo story is fake news. It cannot even be called government propaganda. As the US Government has not issued a proper statement or any statement claiming Russian hacking.
The “news” of the alleged Russia hacking is properly described as fake news and there is a coup in the USA.
It is fake news because it is full of false, discredited, and discreditable statements and claims based upon alleged anonymous sources whose credibility is un-established as no one knows who they are or what their agenda is. The story is also fake news as it has an agenda to further a coup by certain CIA factions against the President Elect.
As most of us know – Fake news is simply fake news. Its been around for ever. We don’t need a new definition/ explanation of this alleged “new thing” fake news. There is nothing new about fake news. Fake news is news that is fake.
The Russian hacking story is fake news. Until the US Government makes this claim officially.
Its amazing how this fake news has turned into a coup attempt.
Yes let Obama disclose any evidence of Russian hacking. Let him also disclose any evidence of Saudi intervention in the US election. Or Chinese. Or European. Or NATO? Or by Corporates? Or by Wall Street? or by the CIA?
Let Obama also disclose any evidence of foreign money given to the Clinton Foundation that played a role in the US election.
I call bullshit on the apology that there is good reason for not telling Americans in detail how we know there was a Russian hack. If we are to take any meaningful action based upon the proposition that there were Russian hacks, I am unwilling as an American to accept trust as the basis for decision. I want transparency and deserve it. WTF isn’t Glenn Greenwald your Editor in Cheif? Would he accept less as journalist? I don’t think so.
It is helpful if we all try to keep multiple independent thoughts. One bad act does not compensate for another; No need for some form of zero sum ethic!
Thoughts:
Hillary is corrupt and a pathological liar
Trump is corrupt and a pathological liar
A whole host of our politicians are corrupt and liars
There may have been interference; it may have been from a Russian source
Focusing on the last thought — if it is an interference worthy of such attention, then there must be a significant negative impact. Where is the evidence that implicates Putin and the Russian establishment, and what is this significant impact?
Perhaps exposing DNC for lies and deceit is considered a significant negative impact?! For whom?
that’s just it, IF, THEN, there would be no significant impact.
The criminals operating with the democratic party are just using this crap as a lever to influence the election results.
_”CIA confirms Ventura meeting occurred”_
“Shortly after taking office in 1999, Jesse Ventura writes he was asked to attend a meeting at the state Capitol. He says 23 CIA agents were waiting for him in a basement conference room.”
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2008/01/03/jessecia
MPRnews.org is the site of Minnesota Public Radio News. It can be accessed from the top of the page of the Minnesota Public Radio web site.
And if Sanders had been “the real deal” and not a stooge for Clinton he could have run as an Independent and beaten Clinton, Trump, Stein and Johnson in a five way race and would have polled over the 15% to be in the debates.
Sanders was crazy. The Democratic Socialist National Committee simply protected the proletariat from unbalanced candidate Bernie, by helpfully using Peoples Delegates.
I can see some benefit to the establishment by weakening Trump before he is inaugurated so they can force him to do their bidding, but not to average Americans because the establishment obviously doesn’t care about us. The establishment supports most of the bad policies that Trump will pursue, so it won’t lead to a better four years for us.
If this neo-McCarthyism and fearmongering (which already has effectively corralled Republican senators to support an investigation they don’t want and pledge allegiance to the CIA, thus distancing themselves publicly from Trump ) is actually used to overturn the election that Hillary lost for unrelated reasons, then all hell WILL break loose in this country… not good for average Americans in any way.
The third option… literally… of using this nonsense to select neither Trump nor Hillary will still result in a president that is undeserving and also doesn’t care about average Americans.
This seems like a lose-lose-lose scenario.
If the actual truth is revealed… someone below mentioned freedom and immunity for Assange may be the only way… then it would have to be considered positive.
But if it’s all about spin and shenanigans and power plays to maintain the corrupt status quo, we’d all be better served if everyone who mentions the issue has to put a dollar into a pot for starving children or something.
But back in the real world, I hope my fellow anti-establishment travelers join me in reveling in the exposure of how both major parties are corrupt and pathetic, and how all this nonsense is weakening them both.
Neocon Mitch McConnell, who tried to sink Rand Paul’s candidacy; and the braggart John (“Has Rand Paul ever been to Syria? Has he ever met with ISIS?”) Keating McCain; and Checkpoint Charles “No-Ride List for Amtrak” Schumer;….
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-security-trains-idUSTRE7472CF20110508
I would give my left nut for a different president than Trump, but as a father I can’t even mildly wish for a scenario where Trump gets the victory pulled out from under him now. Seriously there would be only one outcome – civil war. A civil war I couldn’t even blame them for causing.
For anyone lusting for a civil war, remember most of the gun nuts are on the right, most of the military is conservative, and most of the police are conservative. For those of us on the left, I do not see a rosy scenario.
Don’t you miss the leftists’ deep state already?
Don’t you really want all those hundreds of billions of dollars of new aircraft smell Air Force Ones, and F-35s? To liberate Syria with?
“‘It’s got to stop and it’s got to stop immediately': Joe Scarborough knocks Trump for clash with CIA” on businessinsider.com.
“Scarborough described Trump’s criticism of the CIA as ‘unprecedented’ and advised that it was ‘not a wise thing to do.’
‘The last agency I would tweak would be the CIA,’ Scarborough said…. ‘That is the last agency you cross when you’re the incoming president of the United States.’ ”
Joe knows.
“Joe knows zilch”, that should have read…
wow – never imagined that JS would cower like that.
Trump is not afraid of the CIA nor should he be.
Were i pres, i would fire all top management – every last one.
Mr. Obama, the whole world would like to know how Putin helped President Trump to be elected. Can you share the information you and the CIA have with the world? Thanks a lot.
“Here is our offer at The Intercept: If anyone has solid proof that Russia interfered with U.S. elections, send it to us via secure drop and we will verify its legitimacy and publish it.”
Great idea! You should *also* make the reverse offer: If anyone has solid proof that the claims about Russian hacking are bogus (as the claims of WMDs were, for example), send it to you and you’ll publish it. Remember what George Washington said.
We keep using the term “meddling” which sounds pretty bad, however as far as I can tell the worst meddling that was done was well – releasing the truth?
Damn those ruskies for unleashing the truth on us! How dare they!
Ok, it would have been nice if they had released some truth about Trump, but when you have a guy who seems to have pretty well documented accusations of sexual assault and his supporters *still* love him, it’s kind of hard to imagine what truth it would take to make a difference here…
No one knows if it was the “truth” unleashed or not, what contexts were deleted, what was edited on these private communications. And, while there is no “fair” or “equal opportunity” hacking, the info dug up on Trump pales in comparison to what the hackers could have found: tax records, foreign bank loans, true economic worth, foreign investments, etc.
Zero. Goose egg. But Hillary knows who the violent lip-biter is.
The former intelligence analyst, British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, and chancellor of the University of Dundee, Craig Murray, claims to have MET the individual/individuals who “leaked” the DNC and Podesta emails to Wikileaks:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/exclusive-intelligence-officer-met-dnc-email-leaker-confirms-nsa.html
He claims to be close to Assange and Assange has assured Murray that Russia had nothing to do with the leaks.
We have to ask the obvious question, “who benefited from the leaks”?
Obviously Trump. But are there possibly others in the NSA/CIA/FBI etc. who were privy to EVERYTHING regarding The Clinton Foundation and The State Department emails who made a decision that the public simply had a right to see the truth regarding the DNC/Sanders/the leaked debate questions, and the way the Clinton campaign was being run PRIOR to the election? That the leaks had NOTHING to do with any support for Trump, but only a disgust with the corrupt Clinton’s?
There are probably scores of Americans inside these agencies with the ability to obtain the information and give it to Assange. Especially to Assange and to Wikileaks, an organization that has NEVER revealed a source.
UN Team Heard Claims of ‘Staged’ Chemical Attacks
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/08/un-team-heard-claims-of-staged-chemical-attacks/
Obama can go fuck himself.
Propaganda, Intelligence and MH-17
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/08/17/propaganda-intelligence-and-mh-17/
I can already hear the briefing we (the public) will be given.
“The material I will present to you comes from a variety of sources. Some are U.S. sources. And some are those of other countries.
Some of the sources are technical, such as Internet tracings and the linking of real world identities to social media identifies. Other sources are people who have risked their lives to let the world know what Vladimir Putin is really up to.
I cannot tell you everything that we know. But what I can share with you, when combined with what all of us have learned over the last few weeks , is deeply troubling.
What you will see is an accumulation of facts and disturbing patterns of behavior. The facts on Russia’s behavior – Russia’s behavior demonstrate that Vladimir Putin and his regime have made every effort – every effort – to interfere with the American election. Indeed, the facts and Russia’s behavior show that Vladimir Putin and his regime aren’t even trying to conceal their desire to meddle in the American election and place Trump in the White House…”
Now, that the voice I hear giving this is Colin Powell’s, and that I acknowledge that this speech is mostly the work of whoever wrote his UN Iraq WMD speech shouldn’t concern you at all. After all, the CIA etc did promise that they’d never again ‘sex up’ something just because a sitting President wanted them to, just as the media promised they’d never again let themselves be sold a conspiracy theory without questioning the motives of the sources, the credibility of the ‘evidence’, or without making sure they warned the public that evidence of the claim was scarce.
Well, Obama did say that Donald Trump was “unfit to be President”.
Maybe that transition isn’t going to be so smooth after all.
It’s an excellent imitation, I must say!
Exactly. There won’t be any information of a kind that could convince skeptics or those who know something about the technicalities of hacking. However there’ll be sufficient jargon and officialese to harden the stance of those who’ve already decided that Clinton is the victim of Russian foul play. And we’ll be told the usual bull about the sensitivity of methods and sources which precludes anything further being disclosed.
Russian Hacking is just a distraction. It is so obvious that the powers to be assume the public doesn’t even have the basic intelligence of a degenerate poker player who simply pushes aside the element of distraction in order to focus on what is real in the now.
While we dwell in the realm of distraction they are winning all our chips.
The Huns are coming. The Russians are coming, the Chinese are coming, the Muslims are coming, and the Russians are coming again. They want us to focus on all the wicked guys that are coming so we ignore the wickedest guys that have long been here”.
We are not at war with Eastasia…
what are you talking about? we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.
Exactly. I enjoy talking to you. Your mind appeals to me. It resembles my own mind except that you happen to be insane.
You know, I find that jealousy part extremely clumsy. I just tried reading the “modern
English” version of this address and it is not any easier to read. (I tried to imagine jealousy, but I cannot relate to the emotion.) You cannot convince me that it’s not a clumsy quote, but I appreciate the sentiment. Have a go, if you’d like – it’s #35: http://www.nibleycitycouncil.com/farewell_address_today.html
Whose line is this – “…Democrats’ political timidity?”
‘Exactement.’
Good for you, both.
Clean, concise, and honest.
Who could complain?
The US is hoping that Russia did it. Putin is a worthy adversary and there’s no shame in being outmaneuvered by him. The alternative – that some 12 year old hacker single-handedly changed the course of the election – is more disturbing.
Is the US system so fragile that it crumbles the first time it encounters a bit of real news? US voters have long had a reputation for being impervious to the truth. So why couldn’t they handle the revelation that Mrs. Clinton had a private and a public policy position? That should have bounced harmlessly off their collective skulls, not changed the course of an election.
Something has gone seriously wrong with the US voter. Rather than investigate the possibility of Russian hacking, Mr. Obama should launch a formal inquiry into US voters. Why do they suddenly care about the truth, and why didn’t they passively accept the candidate anointed for them? If US politicians can’t answer those questions, then Russia is the least of their problems.
Thanks.
Hey Mussy , I thought you had a friggin workin brain . Now this ?
What the hell happened ? Are you now taking all the sword rattling crap seriously ?
Look Pal ,, the human species has a big problem now .
Nuclear weapons might just be the answer to the right for the 99.99% screaming for air and water .
And your fu-kin says PRIVATIZE IT !!
Got It !!
” Mr. Obama ” ?
Well,, shucks and do ya’ll shoes need a shine suh ?
Obama has been the biggest house N-I-GH-GH-A since Clarence Thomas .
Maybe Trump will let him in the back door ,, No ?
If you don’t like using his title, President, then it’s only proper to call him Mr Obama.
Your comment is offensive and unnecessary.
Unless you’re black, please, don’t use the N-word. Really it just isn’t cool and can’t be made cool. Even if I get your point, it just sounds racist…
My maternal grandfather , Octave Rouge , had the Black gene ,, Front& Center . I was born on Cane River about ten miles NW of Slidell , January 15 , 1939 . Granpa was the sheriff and he had family , and he wore his guns slung low .
All you fancy city people don’t know shit from shinola .
And Yes , I do know the difference between being Black and being a Nig–A !
It like being Martin&Ali , or being Clarence Thomas&Barack Obama !!
Don’t you come at me with that Black White shit ,,, Boy !!!
Go away, idiot.
O, Benito,
You’ve done it again w/the 12 year-old hacker line.
I laughed out loud.
Investigate the voters, indeed.
Hey Mussy , here’s the odds on the fifth at Hialeah
1—Russian–8 to 1 — runs well in low IQ neighborhood
2—Communist– 20 to 1 –doesn’t have the verve since Nixon died
3—Terrorist– 3 to 1—runs well in a low IQ company
4—Muslim– 7 t0 1–should do well on a Bibical track
5– Catholic– 7 t0 1–should do well on a Biblical track
6– American –10 to 1 — Just shoot the all the other horses
7– Turd— 2 to 1 —A thing that always come thrul
8—The Pope—30 to 1—He talks to God ,, and collects the money
9—A Horse called Reason-1,000,000,000 to 1—-A horse running wild
Right on target Mr. Mussolini.
Heh heh. Some of your best work, Mr. Mussolini.
Obama a proponent of the Democratic Party will of course never take the advice of this article. To me evidence of “hacking” may be offered up somewhere alone the line but that is irrelevant. Of course both the USA and Russia hack and otherwise create havoc in other countries. However, here the specific charge by the CIA and various Dem operatives is that Russia both hacked and gave Wikileaks the Podesta emails, and did so to help elect Trump. Evidence of unrelated “hacking” should draw the big yawn is deserves.
Of course, there is a much more viable candidate for ‘meddler’ in the election than Putin/Russia. Not only does this candidate have more to gain from Trump winning, it has long standing ties with both parties at the highest levels, ‘volunteers’ and actual workers for the campaigns and parties with known ties to it are considered normal, it has influence in the media outlets of the US that it has used in the past to promote its agenda, practice using ‘fake news’ (or benefitting from that generated by others, some of whom it helped fund) to swing public opinion, and it is possible that it may have bought (or helped buy) US foreign policy decisions and policies ranging right up to outright war.
The candidate? Exxon
And think of this, not only does Trump’s opposition to global warming countermeasures that will impose costs on oil companies and consumers give them a big motive to doing what they can to put Trump in the Oval Office, the value of the enormous leases Exxon holds in Russia rise significantly if Trump kills the ‘sanctions’.
Great offer, Jeremy. Somehow I doubt that it will be taken, though. Usually the whistle blowers are those who debunk propaganda, not Deep State purveyors of it.
But thanks for stepping up, and offering safe haven to would-be public truth tellers.
If you believe in the old adage that an informed democracy is a stronger democracy then didn’t these leaks benefit American democracy?
I don’t condone hacking per se but when the American people are being deceived by those entrusted to operate the political system that they depend on to run the machinery of democracy fairly and impartially, isn’t the revelation of that corruption in the public interest? Isn’t this the same case that many of us agree should apply to Snowden?
There is a big difference between manipulating someone with false information and the dissemination of truth. We embody that principle in our own libel laws. Truth is an absolute defense.
If the actions under investigation involved false information or some other sort of underhanded manipulation of facts then the vehemence about a Russian connection would make more sense. Yes, Snowden did, in fact, steal confidential information and perhaps Russia did, in fact, sponsor the hacking of the DNC and Podesta email systems. But like Snowden, what we are talking about here are actions that resulted informing the American people about a serious breach of duty by Democratic party undermining a free and fair electoral process. I personally find it pretty difficult to be overly angry with whomever it was that brought that matter into the open.
Thus I fear that the hysteria over the matter may well be fueled, at least in some part, by our collective and well-justified anxiety over a Trump presidency on one hand, a frustration about getting beat at the polls on the other.
Unfortunately I think we live in a post-informational society. That is, there is so much information, ala Neil Postman, that the truth is useless. We are saturated with information to the point that we can no longer parse it all outside of using it to buttress our already preconceived notions.
Look at Trump and Clinton – based on information at best either should have been a massive compromise, and still both had people who adored them like they were some sort of second coming. This all being while all one had to do was literally go watch YouTube videos or read transcripts to see the truth, but even with this irrefutable evidence easily at hand, there were endless “true believers”.
I have to be skeptical when we are given the conclusion before the evidence.
It may be true, but the fact that the Russians leaked emails that Democrats wrote themselves isn’t an indictment of Trump, it is an indictment of Wasserman and Podesta being idiots in written communications, don’t lose sight of that. Wikileaks was not a major factor in the election results, one only needs to examine the post mortems up until a few days ago.
It takes quite a lot of torture to somehow make Trump complicit here. It is the hysterical blood lust and sour grapes at play to blame anyone but themselves in this loss.
Politics as usual unfortunately.
Interestingly enough, Glenn Greenwald doubts the stories about Russian interference.
That’s not what he said in his most recent post. What he did say was as follows:
It was even bolded the entire thing, as opposed to the little bit that I did above (for your consideration), so that people with reading comprehension issues might benefit from something a little extra calling attention to it.
Perhaps you neglected to actually read that story?
Nothing like the US’s proverbial act of PROJECTION, isn’t it? Ironic, hypocritical and utterly embarrassing. If there needs to be any fingerpointing and investigation conducted, it should be on the Obama administration and all of their despicable disgusting cohorts. Fine time to dig up the REAL dirt. And boy, have we got a lot of blood buried in that dirt.
For a long time it has been my opinion that Republicans were a little loco but, since the election, I have realized that the other side of the political equation is downright deranged.
Luckily they haven’t banned alternative parties yet. I say yet because of a bill currently working its way through Congress that has the potential to bring back the worst excesses of the 1950’s Red Scare. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/6393/text#toc-H1F34F7843955494592B6F04108572B27
Thank you for the site. Certifiably demented and deranged and obviously in a manic state to have come up with that document in such a short time.
Trump vs CIA
“I think it would be devastating that the incoming president disregard the findings of the CIA”
“He is disparaging and insulating every analyst currently in the intelligence community today” –CIA officer
“Former officials say that if the mistrust gets any worse CIA officers could have a hard time trusting Trump and his national security team when it comes to Russia” -Brian Ross, NBC News
“(CIA officers) they may be afraid that anything they tell the White House may get back to Russia” –Former National Coordinator for Security and Counter-terrorism, Richard Clarke
“The Russians are not our friends” … Senator McConnell, “I have the highest confidence and a great deal of trust in the professionals at the CIA”
….correction: “disparaging and insulting…”
If what quoted as Clarke’s words is truth then CIA would’ve arrested Trump already as a Russian spy, who already knows too much from his intelligence briefings.
I hear where he has been skipping those daily briefings because they are so “repetitive”.
He apparently told the intelligence community to let him know when they have something “new” and he’ll take a look at it.
Ha!
http://us.pressfrom.com/news/politics/-11075-trump-says-no-to-daily-redundant-intel-briefings-because-hes-a-smart-person/
Oh my gosh. I hope the CIA wins. We know the script if they don’t. CA, OR, WA, and NY will get weapons to begin an insurgency against the Trump regime. Air craft carriers off the west coast will bomb regime strong holds in WI, Ohio, PA, and Michigan in support of local insurgents. Special Forces will land in Chicago and organize armed resistance groups. Victoria Nuland will represent the exiled government in the UN. If the Russians come in, dang, we are looking at no fly zones.
” If the Russians come in, dang, ”
Wolverines!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGhGHxw0mSo
” countries meddling in the internal affairs of others ”
Like Israel and AIPAC?
Even if Russia did help to expose the truth, is that a bad thing?
Apparently if truth has Russian cooties on it, Clinton should be made Queen.
Empress Clinton…
“If a government is willing to lie to justify war, no person in his right mind should trust anything they say on any topic. Ever. ”
@angryhusky
Is America melting down? Or is the world outside of America melting down?
Through rose colored American glasses most often it looks like the world is melting but to deny America is party of that world as some do is to deny reality. On the other hand after decades of these Cold War scenarios that real wars and conflicts America has as an entity decayed as has much of the world far removed form the capitols of the nations of the world,
AS WAR PRODUCES NOTHING OF PERMANENT VALUE, IN WHAT IS SEEN AS VALUE IRONICALLY ONLY WHEN WAR ENDS AND PEACE IS ESTABLISHED.
The world was bad enough during the Cold War but in that the US and NATO has created a Russian Chinese mirror image of itself it is truly FUCKED for the sake of profit and power much like the pre-WWI empires they glide towards world war and conflict for in the police tstaes they exist there is little stopping them. As articles such t he above are intellectual naive pieces of nonsense in presuming truth will sway power hungry idealogues.
Where what is needed is perhaps revolution that also can not be trusted as there are many of those same government agents working there also, in fact some of the most reliable government agents call themselves revolutionaries in what amounts to a very sick joke. Where a moderate Republican as a Democrat called O’Bomber is called a socialist, and a Pro-CIA Social-Democrat as a Democrat is attacked for not being a Democrat enough, and the pathetic existence of western civilization stumbles forward as the best that can be pathetically said of it is that “it knows not what it does”. As intelligence has given way to Madison Avenue advertising and endless BS psychological warfare where they throw the Just and Pious to the lions for entertainment of the tyrants.
Definitely the US, to my mind…
We’ve been hearing the charges for months without a bit of evidence, and have yet to hear or read of any method or manner in which the Russians altered the election, or to what extent. That simply hasn’t been qualified or quantified in the least.
But, in yet another article in today’s New York Times online edition charging Russia with meddling, the article matter of factly states that Putin actually ordered it. Again, not the proverbial shred of evidence to prove it.
The bottom line is, the Russians may well have–rather clumsily, if true–tried to meddle in an American election. But these charges and accusations have been going on seemingly forever. If there is something to see, let’s see it.
It’s more than a little ironic that this whole fiasco came about as the result of the email revelations detailing the DNC’s own election meddling in the form of undercutting Bernie Sanders to secure the nomination for Clinton.
“the DNC’s own election meddling ”
That’s it.
Hey everybody, look over there
Agreed.
And the same should be demanded of Trump with respect to his taxes, his intentions in requesting the list from the Energy Department, and so on.
Why does Trump owe you his tax returns?
It’s called transparency. And it is not to me, but to all the American people. it is also in the spirit of the demand of this article.
To me it seems that it’s the Republicans who are behind the rigging of voting machines and have been at for quite some time. Voter suppression is just another means to the same end. For a few crumbs the Democrats go along with it, like with Bush vs Gore and who knows how many other races. Hopefully this time they won’t.
The US is too corrupt for voting machines. I live in a county where paper ballots are scanned, hand counted, and then hand counted again by a third party. There are also plenty places to vote. If the rest of the country had these standards for counting the vote, we’d be living in a different country.
They can’t declassify something that doesn’t exist.
Bu assuming for argument’s sake that the russian government helped publish information about the american nazis, so what? What is the problem exactly with informing the public about how corrupt and despicable their masters are?
Yes. We need to see the evidence.
I must say it is intensely amusing that the smug left have suddenly been struck with enormous (entirely fake) fear because they suddenly realize Washington was right in saying “foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government”.
But Washington wasn’t suddenly made right with this election cycle, as it appears the press and other left have completely jumped the shark to pretend. And that’s why the claims of tears and fears of the left is utterly fake, along with their pretended and pretentious outrage, as well.
How did the entirely of the Clinton years pass by without any leftists in the press raising hell when presidential elections were heavily financed by Chinese money and the Lincoln Bedroom went up for rent? Was it because their side won?
How did they not notice their Secretary of State (of the same family name) later accomplished basically zero except to burn up jet fuel while huge sums of money were being deposited into her family “foundation” by foreign actors whose interests plainly fell within her scope of official duties and influence?
Foreign influence is a problem? Really? And exactly when was that first noticed in the press?
The interesting thing, of course, is that those “foundation” donations began drying up very soon after Clinton failed to be elected. Did the CIA get right on the case to look into seemingly “connected” behavior by these foreign actors to the rising and falling of Secretary Clinton’s fortunes? Apparently not.
Nobody in the press made any notable fuss about obvious attempts of “foreign influence” to curry favor with one of the most highly placed officials in the federal government. After all, Bill Clinton was the most popular man in America, even though his behavior was arguably no better than Bill Cosby’s, the most despised man in America. Go figure.
Now the ever-vigilant left claim they wake up sweating and trembling in the night because … “foreign influence”. Excuse me a moment while I stifle a sudden laughing fit…..
Certainly none of these “journalists” were running around like their hair was on fire and publishing lurid stories based on alleged anonymous opinions predicated on no visible evidence. (They wouldn’t have had to since the facts were pretty much on record and not disputed by anyone.)
Now these noble patriots are concerned that Putin may be more happy with Trump than Clinton? It appears voters in most states sided with Putin on that narrow question. Perhaps because he “influenced” them.
And if somebody hacked the DNC (cuz it just couldn’t be a leak from anyone living inside that swamp), then obviously it must have been the Russians.
Of course! Only the Russians are ten feet tall and have limitless capacity and authority to hack into systems of other nations …. oh, wait.
This absurd assumption doesn’t even pass the giggle test. The biggest break-in artists in the world are employed by the Five Eyes and everyone knows that who wasn’t raised in a cave.
So what exactly has changed since Mr. Obama was greeted by the left as the Second Coming of Jesus and destined to save the world by grandly touring it to apologize for our presence in it? Anyone?
How has George Washington’s appropriate advice to be suspicious of foreign influence suddenly become relevant to patriots on the left and in the press only after the political wind recently and suddenly shifted against them?
Nonsense. The left (I don’t mean liberals) has always been against foreign interference in political processes and in favor of self-determination, particularly when the foreign interference is imperialistic in nature.
Being “against” something is vague and intangible. It’s like favoring motherhood and apple pie. Everyone may agree, but it’s meaningless.
My question was when leftists (and the mainstream press who typically represent their various concerns) ever went bonkers about “foreign intervention” when it was plainly in support of a candidate they favored over another one they did not.
That happened exactly when?
*crickets*
Alinsky famously pointed out that to defeat the opposition one must hold them to their own standards. Quoted in full:
* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)
What Alinsky did not do is warn the left that this tactic cuts both ways.
You’re confusing the Democratic party, and neo-liberals, with the Left. A common mistake nowadays, but it blows your whole flaccid argument out of the water.
Hillary Rodham Clinton was not too worried about “Russian hackers” when she set up her home brew private server outside the purview of The State Department’s security defenses, eh?
http://harpers.org/archive/2016/12/the-new-red-scare/2/
Seriously?
If this is the best you have to offer ” … give us evidence of Russian collusion, we’ll review that evidence and publish it if we deem it worthy …”
Maybe you haven’t heard of it, but there’s a nifty new search engine called “google.”
You don’t even have to be a journalist to use it.
Here’s one:
Here’s another:
And another:
Or this:
The problem isn’t a lack of circumstantial evidence of Russian involvement in the US election.
The problem is lack of a credible forum.
In a country where a blustering plutocrat can credibly challenge the birth certificate of the US President, and then use that challenge as bait for white nationalists (alt-right) and rely upon various rumor-mongers like Roger Stone or Alex Jones to explain almost anything, and count on the selective publication by an NGO (Wikileaks) and American officials like James Comey to discredit the blustering billionaire’s opponent, where can anyone — even assuming solid evidence — present that evidence in a credible way?
The problem isn’t just Trump.
The problem is year after year of subversive tactics designed to discredit incumbent government officials of one faction by an opposing faction that gains from that subversion.
As far as I can tell, Boris Chernyshev is a Russian ultra-nationalist. Sergei Markov is an organizer of an anti-globalist forum. Viktor Nazarov is governor of a state in southwestern Siberia.
I’m sure WaPo and Politico spent a lot of effort in that quote-mining, but no, quote-mining is also not evidence.
Yeah, not saying the Russians didn’t interfere, but 4 quotes is basically anecdotal evidence. I could take 5 minutes walking around a Trump rally and find 10 times the number of quotes saying that Hillary is a criminal, so by WaPo evidence, clearly she’s a criminal.
What sickens me is MY SIDE is sounding exactly like THEIR SIDE when I was growing up. It was always some commie infiltration sapping and impurifying our precious bodily fluids. Which is just a fancy way of saying, “If it weren’t for those meddlin’ kids,” rather than, “If I wasn’t so fucking incompetent I might have actually won the election.” I mean she lost to goddamn Donald fucking Trump. The only way she should have lost is if the Russians had dug up a video of her dry humping paraplegic 3 year old chained to the rotted corpse of Vince Foster.
Clearly the problem was more than the freekin’ Russians.
Exactly.
Exactly.
Erm… wasn’t she supposed to win against the candiate of her choice?
Please do not take things out of context. Of course Russia would be happier with a new President who wanted to improve relations than one who did not. I’m not an American, but a lot of people in my own country would also like to see those relations improve because peace is in all our best interests. But really the point is that quotes out of context from people who are not in the Russian administration do not constitute proof of anything. As the article indicates, if Obama has anything that looks like solid proof then he needs to release it. I won’t hold my breath.
Sorry, but when it comes meddling in the internal affairs of the USG, Israel is second to none. Google that.
My dear Milton …
I’m sure you wonder why so many people miss your point.
Here’s your problem.
They’re not interested in proof of anything. Even if you had provided a video of Putin drinking vodka with Trump, they would say it proves nothing. They will insist you provide a tape where Putin says, “we’ll make sure you get elected.” Then they’ll say that such a tape only proves Putin likes the fine fellow Trump.
All they really want is reassurance.
As long as you act like a stupid college professor, they’ll badger you with stupid undergrad objections. “But surely Mr. Wiltmellow you aren’t denying gravity?”
Here’s what you should do.
Write a letter to yourself.
Tell yourself to be more careful in the future.
Tell yourself to tell them you’re sorry for suggesting Russia had motive, means, opportunity and history in interfering in other sovereign elections. Tell them it could have been because of hanging chads. Tell them you want to work with them to solve our common problems. Tell them God Bless America. Tell them anything you want because they won’t listen anyway.
Just don’t remind them that Trump is a bigoted fucking moron who is a fraud, a liar, and probably a puppet waggled Putin.
People don’t truly like having a say. That’s why they talk so much.
Sincerely,
MW
Oh, Milton, please.
Yes; there is a credibility problem. It was well articulated by Nathan Robinson in Current Affairs. Given the credibility problems of the NYT, WaPo, et al you really expect to convince people reading in this thread with Google searches?
Having done rounds with an array of academic folks, even the stupidest of my college professors would have laughed me out of class had I offered a similar effort as “proof.” Frankly, if I’m desperate for a credible voice, I’ll take the lead of Marcy Wheeler. If she’s still asking questions, I’m happy to sit in the back of her lecture room, shut up, and take notes. Likely, no one here disputes Russia had motive, means, opportunity and history in interfering in other sovereign elections, but proof that they did in the US is another matter. There are those who claim they have it, who should know whether they have it, and still have a degree (rapidly fading) of institutional gravitas to be believed… providing they show at least some of their work (b/c of that rapidly fading problem which historically! they’ve brought on themselves).
I wasn’t trying to “prove” anything. Smoke isn’t fire. Even, these days, fire isn’t fire. That was sort of one of my points. This call for “proof” is a red herring — like if the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit. It is designed to allow resignation … capitulation. Can’t prove it? Then the opposite must be true.
Of course Russia was collude with Trump. The degree, the specifics, the effect, and the people involved are all matters for debate, mostly hidden, some in plain sight. This isn’t an episode of NCIS. I doubt there will be an ah-ha! moment — so it was Col. Mustard with the candlestick in the conservatory. I knew it!!
Asking for evidence is just another way of saying, “get over it.”
My point, which you apparently gleaned anyway, there is a credibility problem. The credibility problem isn’t resolved with “credible” journalists because (if you haven’t realized this yet) journalists have neither the interest nor the job of delivering credible information. Whether a movie review or an expose of a congressman sending dick-pics, the domain of journalism has devolved into a snooty sort of National Enquirer. Clicks for cash.
(For instance, coastal flooding along the eastern seaboard in the last few years has been record breaking. I have looked for it and I have never seen coastal flooding and climate change linked in the national media. Why not? Plenty of proof, plenty of science, but never “proof” because no proof suffices to prove anything these days. None.)
The credibility problem is structural. There is no white knight, no messiah, no ultimate revelation. There is no domain sufficient to offer credible evidence of this or that. We agree that our money has value because we agree; to disagree brings chaos. So why not call Mexicans rapists or Obama a Kenyan socialist? Why not say Russia has no interest in the US election and no spy agencies to influence? Why not say Podesta has a kiddie porn theater for Democrat elites.
If truth doesn’t matter, then proof is irrelevant.
You scoff because I have no proof? I scoff because even with facts, logic, history and testimony, we have no proof.
Thank you milton. I thought I had wandered over to the Breitbart pit for a minute there.
Best non-fake news site around today: Wall Street On Parade, by the Martens, and they have to say:
http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/heres-why-russia-wasnt-behind-the-wikileaks-emails-leak/
Proof? They’re probably contacting Colon Powell right now to see if he still has the drawings of ‘mobile weapons labs’ so they can rebrand them as “Russian Mobile Hacking Labs’.
Also, if the only intel gleaned by the American public has come forth from WikiLeaks – – and they aren’t the recipient of billions of dollars of wasted and embezzled taxpayer funds, then we should depend on WikiLeaks for further free intel – – since nothing truthful or of any value has EVER come forth from the boobs at the CIA!
They probably keep it in the same file as their old stuff on the fake attack on the USS Liberty and the disinformation file on Lee Oswald.
Seriously, is there anyone that stupid in America today who would believe anything coming out of the CIA? Why not convince us they are legit – – have a full forensic audit on that agency performed, since none has ever been done so before?
CNN’s intel analyst is a former CIA member of their WMD-in-Iraq-fabricated-intel team, Phillip Mudd.
So, does anyone believe anything out of CNN, Fox or CBS??
I sure don’t . . . .
“fake attack on the USS Liberty”
Clearly I’m out of the loop on this one. I had heard about this attack at least 30 years ago. Has it recently turned out to be fake and never happened or what?
I’m saddened to see this article adopt the language that’s been used by every news source to describe the events in question. To say “intervened” and “hacked” is to suggest something vague and vastly more consequential than the specific issue that’s actually being discussed.
We’re talking about the release of Clinton campaign and DNC emails via Wikileaks, right? The CIA has not accused the Russians of “hacking the election,” a phrase that brings to mind manipulation of electronic voting machines.
Further, if the NYTimes is to be believed, the slam-dunk case is a circumstantial one, based on motive, opportunity, and the fact that nothing damaging to Trump was released by Wikileaks.
To persist in using “intervened” and “hacked” muddies the waters, unless you mean to say that the CIA is asserting something beyond responsibility for information given to Wikileaks.
Exactly. I’m not saying it’s ethical or ideal, but the terrible crime the Russians are being accused of here is, horrors of horrors, releasing the truth. For that, whether it’s even true, we are willing to risk creating another cold war.
I went through the cold war and it was not a joke. Growing up wondering if you’re going to witness nuclear armageddon is not fun. As much as terrorists (TM) suck, it doesn’t compare to wondering if you and everyone you ever cared about’s skin is going to get fried off because someone got a little twitchy.
That said, Bond movies might have some good villains again. A good KGB spook beats a drug lord or terrorist any day.
The US regime have used 9/11 to give themselves all permissions to interfere politically, economically and militarily in the affairs of every sovereign nation on the planet.
A thorough probe into 9/11 will make many other investigations redundant.
The Clintons want to start WWIII, whether they are president or not. That seems to be the only goal.
Do you even perceive of the irony of such conspiratorial under-founded statement in the context of a demand for decisive proof of an allegation?
Regardless of who hacked the emails – the content was not denied. So how the hell was this interfering with the election?
Forget providing the evidence when these claims come from the classic ‘anonymous officials’. If you can’t even put your ****** name to it, what do you think it is?
Find it hard to believe that anything provided by the Russians, if there was anything, had any effect on the election. Most people who voted Trump, third party or left their ballots blank will tell you that this entire Russian narrative made them fear Clinton more, i.e., that she wanted war with Russia. So the Clinton campaign was entirely incompetent in making this an issue in the first place. All it ever did and is doing now is serving fresh meat to people who have always been in her corner.
Precisely.
I object to the phrase “hacking the election.” It is poetic license at best. The Russians (amongst others) may have hacked emails. But, unless you are saying they actually hacked into voting machines or diddled the vote count, I have no idea what people are babbling about.
American Democracy is SUPPOSED to be robust enough to tolerate vigorous debate. We all saw the debates. We all read the same newspaper articles. We all knew Hillary had email problems, corruption problems, dynasty problems (Clinton fatigue) well before the election. We all knew The Donald had “Twitter Fingers.” (Twittereah?) This was about as aboveboard and honest as any election I have ever seen.
The Wikileaks revelations actually INCREASED transparency of America’s political process. And it doesn’t matter whether the Russians did it or not. Unless you are going to argue that we need LESS transparency. If our Democracy is so fragile it can be anonymously hacked, it isn’t worth spit.
On the other hand Russian, propaganda can be pretty mean at times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THrZZ95i8zQ
*twitterrhea*
To state the obvious, the confusing language is intentional.
Indeed, whether Russia actually hacked the DNC and provided Wikileaks with those emails (or not) shouldn’t make a damned bit of difference. No one of whom I’m aware actually denied that the emails were real and they indeed provided us with a great deal of information regarding the, at the very least underhanded, machinations by the DNC to insure that Clinton won the primary.
Exactly your words. I could have reordered them but I didn’t.
I did not change a single word you wrote.
But by selectively choosing your words, I delivered an entirely different message than that which you intended.
Imagine what a motivated Russian spy could have done with tens of thousands of emails.
Imagine. Exactly your word.
“Exactly your words. ”
You just pulled those words from some dictionary.
You’ve proven nothing with your ordering of my words. No one ever denied that the emails were genuine, nor has anyone denied their meaning.
“On the other hand Russian, propaganda can be pretty mean at times.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THrZZ95i8zQ”
this is your example of russian propaganda?!?! ha ha ha ha
wake up kid you havent seen a shit!
I was reading from an official government outlet (NYTimes) that the “facts” were all circumstantial, BUT that it was okay for CIA security professionals to make definite conclusions from circumstantial “evidence” as they are professionals at drawing certainty from uncertainty so shut your mouth. My guess as a professional amateur in these matters, will be that some stuff like the DNC hack will be noted as given and proven (even though Assange says different), and the rest too secret to tell, with alot of FUD from official government outlets to cover up everything else,
The Clinton campaign, the CIA, her supporters, and the mass media are opening a door which once fully opened can never be shut. And what comes out from the other side of the door will not be good. Not good at all.
Just a suggestion to The Intercept. Put your investigative reporters on the case to look at what known hacks (is phishing considered a hack?) have accomplished, if anything. For example, what did the polls show after the Wikileak revelations. What were the poll movements in WI, PA, MI, Ohio, and Florida that might be directly or even indirectly attributed to Wikileaks publishing of the contents of their leaks. Contact your best statisticians. Contact Nate Silver about his contention that his numbers indicating no hacking of machines in WI. What official government outlets like WaPo are telling us is Putin changed the results, but maybe me, but I have yet to read one sentence that says “for example, ….” and oh, “here is another concrete example. “
It’s certainly good to challenge the notion that evidence actually exists at all.
Personally, I think the idea that Trump unfairly benefited by proof of Clinton’s shady behavior is getting more darkly humorous by the day.
What “proof … of … shady behavior”?
The Podesta emails only revealed that the Democrats strategized the election, the DNC release establish no connection between their preference of her and Clinton herself, and despite Wikileaks claims, there is no email linking her to ISIS weapons’ sales.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Tell you what: show me a link to a single Wikileaks email that supports your claim about her, and explain why it is “shady”.
Otherwise, your laughter is hollow.
You can’t possibly be that demented. Jesus fucking Christ.
Okay… I finally stopped laughing and can respond sensibly. The Young Turks: Wikileaks BOMBSHELL Exposes Extent Of Clinton Corruption
Not a Wikileaks email link.
The video shows quotes from many places and fails to list sources that can be followed. In addition, many of its claims are interpretive rather than factual.
All I am asking for is “a single Wikileaks email that supports your claim”.
I don’t give a hoot what you are asking for, but what I’ve linked to answers your impotent complaint. Many emails discussed by Cenk on that vid support my claim, and his assessments are extremely telling. If you are trying to say the emails he discusses are false you had better back that up, because WikiLeaks has never been found to manufacture information released.
The video is a very comprehensive overview of particularly “shady behavior” on the part of the Clintons and their Foundation – precisely the point and substance of my original post which you questioned so weakly. Anyone reading this discussion can watch the clip and see for themselves.
I haven’t contested that some interpret the emails as the video does, only your claim that the emails contain a decisive proof for these interpretations. They do not, and the video is an allegation, not a proof, which in the context of the article above, is all that matters.
Have you ever read through one of those emails? When the Podesta emails were starting to come out I read the one which listed some points from one of her paid speeches. I haven’t read it all, but I distinctly remember that it was, contrary, unremarkable, but rather a dry point-by-point list of topic raised in it. I also tried to search through the ISIS-related emails for a direct link between her and the sale of arms to the group. I found none, in several word-combinations.
The emails themselves are the evidence, the “proof” – just as the absence of evidence is absence of proof in the case of what is claimed to be Russian hacking discussed above – and that the public was influenced negatively by these releases (which is what is being claimed as intervention) is certainly evidence that many – not just Cenk and myself – considered (or interpreted, to use your word) the emails as “proof” of something shady, suspicious enough to cause concern, or the emails would have been regarded generally as just as innocuous as you pretend to find them.
Only the content of the emails can be evidence. There are many who agree with you, and if that’s sufficient for you, then enjoy. I have not read all the emails, so I cannot say definitively that they are not an evidence, but those I DID read were a pale version of what they were made to be by others.
I do want to thank you for spending the time on something you considered ridiculous and “demented”. Thanks.
You’re very welcome. I genuinely enjoyed the laugh, and still find (what I perceive to be) your willful ignorance amusing.
And I the fact you haven’t actually read a single Wikileaks email on which you base your harsh condemnation. Funny.
The fact that Cenk reads a few emails on the clip I linked to proves I’ve read at least some of emails, unless you stupidly intend to claim I haven’t watched the video. Glad we’re so giggly together, though!
Adelson and AIPAC are going to find the driver’s seat a bit crowded with Putin wedging himself in.
At least when Tammany Hall was running the show, it was Americans.
I’m amazed at how many Clinton supporters still want her to be president, even now, because of this.
If we accept that the emails’ release affected Clinton poorly in the election, this is confirmation that the thusly-informed public didn’t think she should be president because of what the emails revealed.
To turn around and say this “intervention” (telling the truth) means she should be president is astonishing cognitive dissonance.
Indeed. My suspicion is that there were Russian hackers involved, but to equate that to personal involvement by Putin or the FSB is equivalent to blaming every hack by Americans on Obama. But I am not sanguine about the ability of Congress to focus on facts and not let their imaginations run wild. If it turns out that even a single person of Russian nationality is involved, the Clintonites will claim that Putin himself directed the campaign.
Also, let’s face it: Vladimir Putin is an intelligent man, and a former trained officer of the KGB to boot. There is very little likelihood that he would be so stupid as to leave a trail of connections between his inner circle and the people who did the hacking.
In the end, history will show that Hillary Clinton and the democrats were defeated as a result not only of their dishonesty, but mostly due to their amazing level of hubris. She began running for president in 2009, and left a trail of faulty behavior and decisions so prominent that even Donald Trump could beat her. Private e-mail server; deleted e-mails; secret speeches to the big banks; quid pro quo with dictatorships in exchange for gifts to the Clinton Foundation; promotion of a war, for Christ’s sake, to enhance her stature; “We came, we saw, he died (giggle, giggle)” on national television. It would truly be difficult to top that record! (And yet we hear the lamentations of the deceived. . .)
Clinton: “We came, we saw, he died (giggle, giggle)”
Anyone who has actually witnessed the clip showing Clinton making that comment on camera gets a full-frontal view of exactly who and what this woman really is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y
Thanks for posting the link. I downloaded it some weeks ago. Every time I felt a twinge of desire to vote for her instead of Jill Stein, and now, every time I feel a twinge of fear over Trump’s presidency, I watch it. Does the trick quite nicely.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/12/13922454/hillary-clinton-electors-podesta
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/electoral-college-intelligence-briefing-russia-election_us_584ee466e4b0e05aded4da1b?
And, lest anyone assume I want to see HRC as POTUS, let me assure you that I didn’t vote for her. That said, there is something to be said for proportional representation. Some states have a winner-take-all “requirement” under penalty if the elector is “faithless.” Many legal minds assume that would not survive a SCOTUS challenge. And, @lessig and others have set up a confidential system by which electors can investigate their legal options and potentially get legal help should they choose to challenge. While the electoral college is in the Constitution, winner-take-all is not.
I’m simply tired of the hand-wringing over Trump. He played the game, and won. But, for those who are deeply enmeshed in the Politics of Fear (h/t Corey Robin), or close to some whose well-being you genuinely fear for, then get off your dead asses and pound the door of your states electors. Give them the support they’ll need to take the mantle of “faithless.”
I didn’t vote for her either but as I noted in Greenwald’s latest mega-thread this resonates:
I’m simply tired of the hand-wringing over Trump. He played the game, and won. But, for those who are deeply enmeshed in the Politics of Fear (h/t Corey Robin), or close to some whose well-being you genuinely fear for, then get off your dead asses and pound the door of your states electors. Give them the support they’ll need to take the mantle of “faithless.”
I would support a challenge to the winner-take-all status quo. Proportional representation within the EC makes sense if one truly believes in democratic institutions as opposed to a system filled to the brim with opportunities to game and corrupt it.
It is a privilege reserved to the individual states to decide how they will apportion their electors, which explains why the Constitution is silent on that subject. Silence is not an implied authority of the federal government to step in and dictate its preferences. It’s the servant of the states, not their master.
If you believe the way votes are apportioned in your own state, contact your state government and lobby them.
I think that we could do with some more exacerbation of exposed fissures in the deep state that are in a rare state of exposure to the public.
If it is true that Putin did indeed interfere in the election, then I’d rather see the no-fly zone preempted at the ballot box than resolved on the battlefield.
It is not like the Democrats and Republicans have permitted anything close to resembling self-determination in the US for decades.
The permanence of the deep state preempts that. This kind of crisis plays elements of the deep state off against one another.
For those who would want a deep state that has proven itself resiliently resistant to democratic stimulus to be exposed and neutralized, there is plenty more up to fuck here.
Or, alternatively…
For those so inclined: change.org has a petition going to try to get the NY AG to bring the question of proportional representation before SCOTUS.
Urge NY Attorney General to bring a case to the US Supreme Court for a Clinton victory
https://www.change.org/p/new-york-attorney-general-eric-schneiderman-urge-ny-attorney-general-to-bring-a-case-to-the-us-supreme-court-for-a-clinton-victory
oh please!
why dont we sign a petition to bring her’s syrian beloved headchoppers to pay you a visit?
much nicer than having the crook as president?
I could get behind a case that the Electoral College should be awarded proportionally. That would preserve it as a bulwark for smaller states but would limit the destruction to democratic representation posed by the winner-take-all garbage.
It would also force candidates to pay attention to all voters or, at least, a much broader cross-section, as opposed to the strategic slice-and-dice model we have now.
Excellent idea, but it would either have to be decided on a state-by-state basis or we’d need a constitutional amendment. As it stands, neither Article 2 of the Constitution nor the 12th Amendment (the two most directly relevant elements) even requires that the electors be chosen in by popular election. The manner of selection or appointment is up to the states.
If the Texas legislature decided that all the electors would henceforth be appointed by the governor, or on the basis of names drawn from a Stetson, nothing specific in the Constitution prohibits such a decision.
I realize it’s an uphill battle but at this point those are the only kind we really have so, dream big, go hard and try and spell each other when the inevitable exhaustion and hopelessness sets in.
Constitutional amendments would be an uphill battle even after a relatively less polarized election. Maybe some day…. Electors tend to be the most partisan of the partisans. So, in this year, Hillary would be an impossibly “tough sell” to Republican Electors, never mind the Republican House should it land there. There is another group, the “Hamilton Electors,” who are hoping to peel off just enough Republican Electors to wound Trump just below the threshold and pitch the decision (with their 3 recommendations; likely all “moderate” GOP candidates) to the House of Representatives.
http://www.hamiltonelectors.com/about
I think the EC shouldn’t exist but this is undemocratic partisan bullshit. For anyone claiming differently, two questions:
1. Were you signing petitions to ignore the EC at any point in the last 15 years? (not 16 years, because obviously a lot of people complained bitterly about the EC after Gore lost, but most kept mum about changing it since. But now it’s a big deal again, just by coincidence I guess!)
2. If Clinton had won via the EC but Trump had a pop vote edge, would you sign this petition? Would Lessig be writing articles about how the election’s result could be overturned?
The time to push for change re: the EC is BEFORE not after election results. That’s how you show that you’re objective about disliking the EC due to honest principle, rather than a partisan sore loser.
Thanks for sharing.
Were I a new voter (which I’m not), and since shit ain’t real until it’s real, I do not condemn any new voter for mounting a challenge effort to the electors of their state to consider “deliberation” re: their vote.
And, even for experienced voters who had never considered how pernicious the effects of the Electoral College could be, given shit ain’t real until it’s real, I wouldn’t condemn a similar effort by them, either.
Personally (!), I’m of the opinion that the difference between the popular vote and the assignment of the EC votes (as they currently stand under a winner-take-all tradition) have provided something quite useful this election. It focused attention on a number of issues, on an array of levels, that would have been otherwise ignored.
My personal sentiments aside, I’m not inclined to judge the integrity of any voter who just experienced the outcome of the mother of all “natural experiments” of our electoral system. Sincerely do not feel the need to judge whether they are 18 years old, or 60. That others might feel differently bothers me not all.
Expect to receive nothing since no such evidence exist. Thanks for trying to be the voice of reason. But the fct is that John Podesta and the DNC are still driving the narrative for the formidable Propaganda apparatus known as corporate media.
Jeremy & Jon……
If resolution and public understanding of this matter is your quest, then would not Obama granting unconditional pardons to Assange and Snowden, as a prerequisite to a complete uncensored public release of all known information, be a means of removing even the appearance of any government influence, rather foreign or domestic?
Sorry post note: just had to say…
Wonderful picture at the top of the article by the way…I love it. Can I get glossies?
Little Puter looks so angelic and choir boyish, and the reptilian drone king spitting mad, and the image of the real Lucifer. Boy that look in Obummers eye. Looks like he ready to eat Putin…Way too fuckin funny lol
Calm the f$#k down Yuri. We all don’t need to actually see the hard on you have for Vlad. We get it, he gives you the tinglies down there.
“Little Puter looks so angelic and choir boyish”
response
“Calm the f$#k down Yuri. We all don’t need to actually see the hard on you have for Vlad. We get it, he gives you the tinglies down there.”
you are pretty sick arent you?
im gone answer at your (low) level… taking in account your comment… you pussy got offended for someone attaching your beloved big black obomba cook?
This whole tempest smells like a Clinton-ique. They ALWAYS have someone they blame for everything, especially their own failings. The 90’s reeked of this kind of unsubstantiated waters muddying to confuse and control public opinion. Now it looks like she wants to get the presidency this way. And I VOTED for the bitch! So I’m beleive me, I’m not rooting for T-rump. It’s just that it looks so familiar.
Lying liars, now telling the truth…I don’t think so. I say were’s the proof.
Put up, or shut-up.
Just another distraction from what?
“WHERE’S” the proof.
If you’re going to throw a tantrum then, at the very least, use spell check.
i think you just havent anything to say…
everyone types fast and mistakes are usual… his words were 100% clear!
dont know what is the problem with guys like you…
And if “the Russians” did “interfere” with the election, was said “interference” merely, as we have been told so far, hacking DNC, Podesta, etc. email accounts and arranging for authentic contents of those accounts to be made public?
What honest proponent of informed democracy would be in full-fledged, burning-hair freakout mode over that?
In regards to the integrity of an informed election? No one who meets your criteria. In regards to the implied national security risk? Get out your lighters.
I don’t think the implication is that there may be a national security risk, except to the extent that the clueless systems administrators at the DNC might have been given jobs relating thereto if Clinton had won.
Also, of course, Podesta — he whose password was p[email protected] — probably would have taken another senior White House position.
So, whoever hacked and forwarded this material should receive high praise for protecting US national security.
Spot on, Doug.
Said “interference” was journalism at its best! No real journalist would object to it, and no real journalist would call for a government investigation into its source.
Summary: We want to join the CIA coup, too, but we need a fig leaf in case it fails.
Sorry, it’s a secret. The United States spies on everyone, including you. Do we spy on the Russians more than they spy on us? We may never know because they consider it secret also.
Hell you can not even find the budget of the C.I.A. or the N.S.A. and now you expect TRUTH??
As we spy on them and they spy on us – neither side will admit much about it – being secret they can’t. It actually become an exercise in stupidity. . . What did you know and when did you know.
We could ask that question of every politician and never get an honest answer….. WAS Ronald Reagan the first to claim “I forgot” or “I don’t recall” I think ex-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has the record of number of times using it one session?? If you can not get the truth while it is not secret – – what chance do you have to get it when it is?
Sadly, I believe Obama will do no such thing. It appears the battle for the heart of the country is going on internally, between the FBI and CIA, and with powerful oligarchs and their corresponding ideologies behind each. Who is to gain from toppling Assad and building the Qatar-Turkey pipeline? How close is Exxon CEO Tillerson to Putin, and what plans do they have for the Arctic reserves? It seems that the current administration is doing everything it can to keep Trump from 270. Trump’s cabinet picks are disturbing, but I can’t say I’d be happy to see Clinton at the helm either. It seems we have WW3 on one side and climatic catastrophe on the other. Either way the people lose.
oh came on… playing us all as fools?!?!
my 5yo kid knows very well that there in no evidence, because if that was the case they would be splashed in all our faces!
That’s a key point. The establishment would not be shy at all about naming names and leaking concrete details.
you would see them 24×24 on the corrupt MSM!
That’s a nice editorial piece and an offer I hope someone takes you up on. But it took two of you to write that?
You need hobbies
This would take courage and that is in very short supply among TPTB.
Correct me if I am wrong, but
1. Doesn’t the FBI handle counterintelligence, not the CIA?
2. Doesn’t the NSA handle cyber defense, not the CIA?
The CIA handles “Regime Changes” and that’s what “She” wants, right in the US too, and not some 3’rd world place that no one, except some corporation cares about.
It was stupid not to disband the CIA after Iraq, more stupid when Obama took a dump all over Nuremberg with the torture scandal and now we are about to reap the rewards from giving cancer a “fair break”.
I think it’s simpler than that. The CIA’s budget and relevance depends on conflict with foreign powers.
That’s right, in fact they’re prohibited by law from operating within the US.
This assumes that there is some actual evidence behind the CIA’s propaganda.
That’s the whole point: If there is actual evidence, then it ought to be released, declassified.
I wish to go on record as positing the theory that the CIA is now being placed under tremendous pressure to read its tea leaves so as to implicate the Russian government in the hacking of the DNC mail server. The precedent for it was established in a previous administration, in which the CIA was forced into declaring the presence of WMDs in Iraq. We see how that turned out. Moreover, that behavior, and the subsequent behavior as exposed by Edward Snowden, must lead any objective person to harbor serious doubts concerning anything they now say. I for one will not take any pronouncements based on CIA or NSA material at face value.
Interesting thing about Obama: the last thing he wants to do is to be more open. And that is even assuming that the government has evidence that Russia manipulated Trump’s win.
This what Electors need to know:
“The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations. We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as president of the United States.
Additionally, the electors will separately require from Donald Trump conclusive evidence that he and his staff and advisers did not accept Russian interference, or otherwise collaborate during the campaign, and conclusive disavowal and repudiation of such collaboration and interference going forward.”
JUST letting the Electors in on the CIA’s “Evidence” is insufficient, unless it’s made public it’s still highly suspicious that the CIA would work with the electors to upend an election result without sharing the evidence with all voters.
“Additionally, the electors will separately require from Donald Trump conclusive evidence that he and his staff and advisers did not accept Russian interference, or otherwise collaborate during the campaign, and conclusive disavowal and repudiation of such collaboration and interference going forward.” and this is asking him to prove a negative, a rather absurd one at that.
“conclusive evidence that he and his staff and advisers did not…”
Is there conclusive evidence that you 1) do not work for the CIA and 2) do not beat your spouse?
If you are going to accuse him of beating his spouse or working for the CIA then you had better have proof because to make an accusation you needed to have had proof with which to make that accusation, otherwise it is just slander. Right now the accusation is just slander because no proof has been provided.
As is the accusation that Trump accepted Russian interference.
if you just need to know that.. why dont you just tune in on CNN!
its all there… the russians this… trump that… putin this…
of course all the dirtiness that the emails reveal doent bother you!
It’s irrelevant. Electors are not the jury. And the trial isn’t public. If the investigation is complete then it’s another story and the information has to be released publicly. This is an election we are deciding.
Yeah, that pretty much covers it no matter WHAT side of the issue you fall on.