U.S. Intelligence Report Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to Wikileaks

ThoughtEx. · Jan 5, 2017

"The CIA has identified Russian officials who fed material hacked from the Democratic National Committee and party leaders to Wikileaks at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin through third parties, according to a new U.S. intelligence report, senior U.S. officials said on Thursday."

Further down in the article it says
"One such example, the officials said, was that intercepted messages and conversations among senior Russian officials in Putin’s inner circle indicated they were aware of the hacking campaign and celebrated Trump’s election as a victorious end to the campaign."

CIA Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to WikiLeaks

It seems that our spy agencies are relying on spies to gather information, rather than computer forensics. Who knew spy agencies used spies, go figure...

Quazimodo · Jan 5, 2017

ZZZZZZzzzzzzz...............

Kobie · Jan 6, 2017

Putin is our friend! He helped get Trump elected; ergo, conservatives are just fine with this kind of thing. When it happens to them (not if, but when), I guarantee you we'll be hearing a different tune.

Kobie · Jan 6, 2017

Quazimodo said:
ZZZZZZzzzzzzz...............

So you're fine with foreign governments exerting influence over American elections. Good to know. I'll mark you down in the pro-Putin camp.

Redress · Jan 6, 2017

Kobie said:
Putin is our friend! He helped get Trump elected; ergo, conservatives are just fine with this kind of thing. When it happens to them (not if, but when), I guarantee you we'll be hearing a different tune.

A fair number of conservatives are very unhappy with Russia over this. Trump supporter != conservative.

Chomsky · Jan 6, 2017

ThoughtEx. said:
"The CIA has identified Russian officials who fed material hacked from the Democratic National Committee and party leaders to Wikileaks at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin through third parties, according to a new U.S. intelligence report, senior U.S. officials said on Thursday."

Further down in the article it says
"One such example, the officials said, was that intercepted messages and conversations among senior Russian officials in Putin’s inner circle indicated they were aware of the hacking campaign and celebrated Trump’s election as a victorious end to the campaign."

CIA Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to WikiLeaks

It seems that our spy agencies are relying on spies to gather information, rather than computer forensics. Who knew spy agencies used spies, go figure...

Yep, and now the President-elect who benefited from the hacking is entering office to restructure the intelligence agencies.

Do you want to bet "restructuring" means "purging" all that don't tow his line? Like some Orwllian fiction? Except it's real life in an America I never thought I'd see, and it makes me ashamed.

Kobie · Jan 6, 2017

Redress said:
A fair number of conservatives are very unhappy with Russia over this. Trump supporter != conservative.

Fair enough; however, the sane conservatives lately seem dwarfed by the Trumpanzees lately.

Kobie · Jan 6, 2017

Chomsky said:
Yep, and now the President-elect who benefited from the hacking is entering office to restructure the intelligence agencies.

Do you want to bet "restructuring" means "purging" all that don't tow his line? Like some Orwllian fiction? Except it's real life in an America I never thought I'd see, and it makes me ashamed.

1. TOE. You do not tow a line. You TOE a line.

2. That is EXACTLY what is going to happen. The intelligence officials who are bringing this to the fore will be summarily dismissed from their duties.

Utility Man · Jan 6, 2017

:usflag2:

Chomsky · Jan 6, 2017

Redress said:
A fair number of conservatives are very unhappy with Russia over this. Trump supporter != conservative.

I don't want to make a True Scotsmen post, but I really doubt if many conservatives accept Russia's influence in our election.

Trumpeters and some GOP might, along with some of the Alt-Right, but I doubt (American) conservatives do. It's pretty much antithesis to being an American conservative - in my dictionary. The conservatives I know & knew were always pretty big on things like America, freedom, liberty, and democracy. And Russia's actions seem to be in direct conflict with that I listed.

So I'm not exactly sure who all the Americans supporting & accepting Russia's influence are, but I doubt many are American conservatives in the traditional sense of the word.

Chomsky · Jan 6, 2017

Kobie said:
1. TOE. You do not tow a line. You TOE a line.

2. That is EXACTLY what is going to happen. The intelligence officials who are bringing this to the fore will be summarily dismissed from their duties.

Yeah, right, next thing you're going to tell me is what we had hanging this Christmas wasn't Missle Tow! :2razz:

(and it's "toe *the* line") :mrgreen:

upsideguy · Jan 6, 2017

Quazimodo said:
ZZZZZZzzzzzzz...............

Ronald Regan would be so proud...

Hawkeye10 · Jan 6, 2017

The ebullient reaction among high-ranking Russian officials — including some who U.S. officials believe had knowledge of the country’s cyber campaign to interfere in the U.S. election — contributed to the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment that Moscow’s efforts were aimed at least in part at helping Trump win the White House..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...sia620p:homepage/story&utm_term=.5df78bf4297e

WOW, who knew that the cheering of a winner is proof that the one cheering cheated in the game in their favor. There seems to be a flaw in the logic.

Other key pieces of information gathered by U.S. spy agencies include the identification of “actors” involved in delivering stolen Democratic emails to the WikiLeaks website, and disparities in the levels of effort Russian intelligence entities devoted to penetrating and exploiting sensitive information stored on Democratic and Republican campaign networks.

Fingering a suspect is not proving that they are guilty, and the fact that that the R's did not get hacked proves nothing

Those and other data points are at the heart of an unprecedented intelligence report being circulated in Washington this week that details the evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign and catalogues other cyber operations by Moscow against U.S. election systems over the past nine years.

Those "data points" are crap, there better be more, a lot more and a lot more better quality.

Is there even one intercept of something on the order of "We did it!"??

I tend to doubt it.

I will wait on what Trump thinks.

Moot · Jan 6, 2017

Chomsky said:
Yep, and now the President-elect who benefited from the hacking is entering office to restructure the intelligence agencies.

Do you want to bet "restructuring" means "purging" all that don't tow his line? Like some Orwllian fiction? Except it's real life in an America I never thought I'd see, and it makes me ashamed.

The Bush administration tried to purge those that didn't toe the party line from the government, too...except they got caught.

Moot · Jan 6, 2017

Hawkeye10 said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...sia620p:homepage/story&utm_term=.5df78bf4297e

WOW, who knew that the cheering of a winner is proof that the one cheering cheated in the game in their favor. There seems to be a flaw in the logic.

Fingering a suspect is not proving that they are guilty, and the fact that that the R's did not get hacked proves nothing

Those "data points" are crap, there better be more, a lot more and a lot more better quality.

Is there even one intercept of something on the order of "We did it!"??

I tend to doubt it.

I will wait on what Trump thinks.

If it talks, walks and squawks like the Russians....then it's "highly likely" that it was the Russians.

Hawkeye10 · Jan 6, 2017

Moot said:
If it talks, walks and squawks like the Russians....then it's "highly likely" that it was the Russians.

To recap my position is that this is not good enough to allow for sanctions, that Obama should have done nothing, and this should have been left for Trump to deal with.

Now I am waiting for what Trump says is proven to his satisfaction by the intel geniuses who have so often been incompetent and wrong and not honest.

Chomsky · Jan 6, 2017

Moot said:
The Bush administration tried to purge those that didn't toe the party line from the government, too...except they got caught.

I remember that, moot.

Moot · Jan 6, 2017

Hawkeye10 said:
To recap my position is that this is not good enough to allow for sanctions, that Obama should have done nothing, and this should have been left for Trump to deal with.

Now I am waiting for what Trump says is proven to his satisfaction by the intel geniuses who have so often been incompetent and wrong and not honest.

My position is that Obama should've done more than what he did...and sooner rather than later.

You don't have to wait too long...Trump is already back peddling from his earlier statements. Now he says he's a big fan of US intelligence and that the media lied that he agrees with Assange....

Trump says 'dishonest media' wrongly claim he agrees with Assange about Russian hacking | Daily Mail Online

Nap · Jan 6, 2017

Moot said:
If it talks, walks and squawks like the Russians....then it's "highly likely" that it was the Russians.

I agree but "highly likely" does not equal proof. I simply don't understand how people are so quick to jump to judgement especially since the last few times we have listened to these same intelligence agencies have had disastrous effects on us

There has been one common theme in every single article about this subject and that is the actual connections between the Russian Hacks and WikiLeaks is inferred, believed to be, or are confident in. There has yet to be a single piece of evidence that links the 2.

austrianecon · Jan 6, 2017

Kobie said:
So you're fine with foreign governments exerting influence over American elections. Good to know. I'll mark you down in the pro-Putin camp.

Personally, I am not fine with it. But what comes around goes around. US has done this for DECADES in other countries.

But I am also VERY skeptical the CIA has identified anybody as this isn't what the CIA does. NSA is the guru for cyber-warfare. NSA hasn't said who did it. Also who ever did DNC and other leaks ironically isn't doing anything we aren't doing. But DNC wasn't hacked. DNC was ****ing stupid.

Redress · Jan 6, 2017

Hawkeye10 said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...sia620p:homepage/story&utm_term=.5df78bf4297e

WOW, who knew that the cheering of a winner is proof that the one cheering cheated in the game in their favor. There seems to be a flaw in the logic.

Try reading for comprehension. See, they did not claim it was proof of cheating. Start by looking up the word "contributed". I know, it is a big word, but give it a shot.

Fingering a suspect is not proving that they are guilty, and the fact that that the R's did not get hacked proves nothing

Again, you are not responding to what you quoted, but instead to something you made up.

Those "data points" are crap, there better be more, a lot more and a lot more better quality.

Since you do not even seem to understand the data points you quote, nor do you even know most of the data points used to make a determination, your judgement is somewhat suspect.

Is there even one intercept of something on the order of "We did it!"??

I tend to doubt it.

If we only acted on intelligence of that order, we would never act.

I will wait on what Trump thinks.

Why do you need some one to tell you what to think?

Chomsky · Jan 6, 2017

Hawkeye10 said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...sia620p:homepage/story&utm_term=.5df78bf4297e

WOW, who knew that the cheering of a winner is proof that the one cheering cheated in the game in their favor. There seems to be a flaw in the logic.

Fingering a suspect is not proving that they are guilty, and the fact that that the R's did not get hacked proves nothing

No, you're missing how this usually works, I think.

These agencies don't often have court level conclusive due process type proof, but rather they look at the sum of data and make a determination given a confidence level.

Check-out the movie "Zero Dark Thirty" to get an idea on how they caught Bin Ladin, and you'll have a better idea on how this works.

Terrorism and anti-terrorism often works similarly. Actually, I suppose these Russian acts may be considered terrorism. They strike at the heart of American democracy.

Those "data points" are crap, there better be more, a lot more and a lot more better quality.

Is there even one intercept of something on the order of "We did it!"??

I tend to doubt it.

I will wait on what Trump thinks.

Why would you consider the opinion of a compulsive liar politician, over the U.S. intelligence agencies? This is the nut that claims he knows more than the generals! He cites Julian Assange, for Chrissake.

Cardinal · Jan 6, 2017

Redress said:
A fair number of conservatives are very unhappy with Russia over this. Trump supporter != conservative.

I can personally understand if those conservatives feel it's ridiculous to be required to state such a categorically ridiculous and obvious thing as "It's bad that a hostile foreign country steered the outcome of our election, mkay?" That said, there are so many of the completely insane and idiotic conservative voices, that the rational ones are needed that much more to present a semblance of balance to the dialogue.

Hawkeye10 · Jan 6, 2017

You found a traitor who led you to Saddam Hussein. Isn’t there one traitor who can tell you where the WMDs are?’ He warmed to the subject, saying Americans were a bunch of ignorant hooligans who did not understand Iraq and were intent on its destruction.
‘Iraq is not a terrorist nation,’ he said. ‘We did not have a relationship with (Osama) bin Laden, and did not have weapons of mass destruction... and were not a threat to our neighbours. But the American President [George W Bush] said Iraq wanted to attack his daddy and said we had ‘weapons of mass destruction.’
Ignoring his goading, we asked Saddam if he’d ever considered using WMDs pre-emptively against US troops in Saudi Arabia. ‘We never thought about using weapons of mass destruction. It was not discussed. Use chemical weapons against the world? Is there anyone with full faculties who would do this? Who would use these weapons when they had not been used against us?’
This was not what we had expected to hear. How, then, had America got it so wrong?
Saddam had an answer: ‘The spirit of listening and understanding was not there – I don’t exclude myself from this blame.’ It was a rare acknowledgment that he could have done more to create a clearer picture of Iraq’s intentions.

CIA agent who grilled Saddam Hussein says US was wrong about him | Daily Mail Online

All evidence point to Saddam being right about everything. And just look at the catastrophic results of our actions which were birthed on either lies or incompetence.

My wife was gone 3.5 years because of this, she has 60% disability PTSD because of this, she thinks that America was not worthy of her service because of this.

HELL NO I do not trust American intell, for this and for a dozen other great reasons.

They need to prove their case.

ACTUAL PROOF

Hawkeye10 · Jan 6, 2017

Chomsky said:
No, you're missing how this usually works, I think.

These agencies don't often have court level conclusive due process type proof, but rather they look at the sum of data and make a determination given a confidence level.

Check-out the movie "Zero Dark Thirty" to get an idea on how they caught Bin Ladin, and you'll have a better idea on how this works.

Terrorism and anti-terrorism often works similarly. Actually, I suppose these Russian acts may be considered terrorism. They strike at the heart of American democracy.

Why would you consider the opinion of a compulsive liar politician, over the U.S. intelligence agencies? This is the nut that claims he knows more than the generals! He cites Julian Assange, for Chrissake.

People go far on onto the ledge when they assume that they know more than I do.

U.S. Intelligence Report Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to Wikileaks

ThoughtEx.

Quazimodo

Kobie

Kobie

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Kobie

Kobie

Utility Man

Sidewalk Inspector

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Chomsky

Social Democrat

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man

Moot

Moot

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Moot

Nap

austrianecon

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Chomsky

Social Democrat

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man

U.S. Intelligence Report Identifies Russians Who Gave DNC Emails to Wikileaks

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Social Democrat

Sidewalk Inspector

Social Democrat

Social Democrat

Pragmatic Idealist

Buttermilk Man

Buttermilk Man

Social Democrat

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Social Democrat

Respected On All Sides

Buttermilk Man

Buttermilk Man

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency