Breaking: New CIA Source – Washington Post’s Russia Story “An Outright Lie”

[easyt65]

The CIA believes there is sufficient 'circumstantial evidence' to blame the Russians.

The FBI relies on a different standard of evidence, one that could sustain a 'criminal prosecution' - hard FACTS.

The fact is there is no 'smoking gun', no 'DNA', no 'confession'.


The evidence the FBI requires to definitively declare Russia hacked the elections is exactly the evidence the President / the United States would need to take before the United Nations. It's the same type of evidence the US would need to justify launching a military Cyber Attack against Russia in retaliation.

THAT type of evidence does NOT exist right now., and as of YESTERDAY, as I pointed out already, the 'overseers' of the Intel Community don't buy the whole story that Russia hacked the elections. Evidently they require more evidence, like the FBI, than the CIA does.


"The FBI does not dispute that the CIA's assessment could be accurate, said a U.S. official with knowledge of the matter. The difference lies in the institutional standards the agencies require in reaching such conclusions. While the CIA develops assessments based on a broad interpretation of available data, the FBI, as a law enforcement agency, requires a standard of proof that could sustain a possible criminal prosecution."

Q&A: Why the CIA, FBI differ on Russian election hacking

 

[ClosedCaption]

Did the hacks happen or not?

 

[easyt65]

Did the hacks happen or not?

That's why Obama is calling for an investigation - to find out.

The CIA says yes, and the Russians did it.
The FBI says the CIA COULD be right ,but the solid evidence is not there to support it.
Julian Assange says it was never a 'hack' but rather an inside job.
The Head of the Intel community said yesterday they have not bought off on the CIA's claim yet.
The WH said the other day that the CHINESE did 'it'

That's my point, CC - people are freaking the F* out and there is not even a consensus on what happened or who did it.


I would not be surprised to find that the information was collected and released by one or more of the MANY people who did not have a security clearance but to whom she gave access to her server and e-mails - Her aides, her lawyers, the tech team who stored her server in their bathroom. There s literally NO TELLING how many people had access to her servers. When that server was just sitting in the bathroom of that tech company any number of people could have had access.


I will add, though, as I pointed out, no President or Ambassador would go before the UN with what 'we' have right now and accuse Russia of hacking.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Did the hacks happen or not?

That's why Obama is calling for an investigation - to find out.

.

I asked you did the hacks happen or not. Take a stance and tell everyone what you're saying. Did the hacks happen at all?

 

[Yarddog]

Now here is a real fake news story that fits the definition of fake news. An unidentified source claiming to be a former CIA person quoting and anonymous source written by an anonymous source on a shady blog site. So here it is, vomited out on USMB. Let's see how fast the trump cultists jump on this story.

 

[easyt65]

I asked you did the hacks happen or not. Take a stance and tell everyone what you're saying. Did the hacks happen at all?

And I told you 4 times already that the question you have posed has not been answered yet. Unlike you and Barry, I do not parrot Fake News and CIA talking points, declaring something to be true when it has not been established as so yet. If you want to, go for it...which you have. Me? I will wait for all the evidence to come in.

 

[jc456]

Everyone knows Russia hacked the DNC. That was announced before the election. The only disagreement is "Why?" One only has to look at what they did with the hacked material to see who they wanted for president. They got him. They got their Agent in the White House. Enjoy your trip to Hell.

what was reported? I never saw anything from the DNC. I only saw podesta's. you sure?

 

[jc456]

Our friends on the left and in the media are desperate and this whole "Russians" thing is the political version of a "Hail Mary" pass in football

The libs on this board are just as desperate, continuing to parrot the 'FAKE NEWS'.

dude, the one that is the show stopper is that they claim they hacked the RNC servers. Well if their intent was to push trump, why would they need to hack the RNC? that has no logic in it at all.

Fakey akey.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I asked you did the hacks happen or not. Take a stance and tell everyone what you're saying. Did the hacks happen at all?

And I told you 4 times already that the question you have posed has not been answered yet. Unlike you and Barry, I do not parrot Fake News and CIA talking points, declaring something to be true when it has not been established as so yet. If you want to, go for it...which you have. Me? I will wait for all the evidence to come in.

So if you are now taking the stance that you dont know if it happened or not why are you saying people dont agree on something you dont know if it happened at all?

Its clear you believe we were hacked because all your defenses were saying people didnt agree over the purpose of the hacks.

Gotcha

 

[jc456]

I bet you believe this "New CIA Source", don't you?

No!

I bet you believed it was the film maker's fault...

he also believed 'hands up don't shoot' as well.

 

[jc456]

Our friends on the left and in the media are desperate and this whole "Russians" thing is the political version of a "Hail Mary" pass in football

The libs on this board are just as desperate, continuing to parrot the 'FAKE NEWS'.

It is an overall effort to delegitimize the Trump Presidency similarly to the effort to delegitimize the Obama administration with the birther issue, which ironically was an important factor in trump's rise in the political theater. The trump Russia connection has far stronger legs than the birther business and will probably hang over trump till the day he leaves office. Payback is a bitch.

Actually the Russian connection has no legs except for what the media is giving it. It is one of the weakest substantiated stories of 2016. There is zero evidence of Russian interference in our elections.

I challenge you to present any.

WHO hacked the DNC and Podesta emails and dumped them on a timely manner on wikileaks?

Republicans? Trump? If not the Russians, then who?

why would they supposedly hack the RNC then?

 

[jc456]

I asked you did the hacks happen or not. Take a stance and tell everyone what you're saying. Did the hacks happen at all?

And I told you 4 times already that the question you have posed has not been answered yet. Unlike you and Barry, I do not parrot Fake News and CIA talking points, declaring something to be true when it has not been established as so yet. If you want to, go for it...which you have. Me? I will wait for all the evidence to come in.

So if you are now taking the stance that you dont know if it happened or not why are you saying people dont agree on something you dont know if it happened at all?

Its clear you believe we were hacked because all your defenses were saying people didnt agree over the purpose of the hacks.

Gotcha

so just post up the evidence it was russia? Assange already said it wasn't Russia. I believe him since he reported the emails. Why don't you believe him?

 

[easyt65]

1. There is actually no new information leading the CIA to its conclusion. The New York Times reports: “The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments..."

2. The “evidence” that the CIA has gathered is inconclusive. The FBI also disagrees with some of the CIA’s conclusions about Russia’s motives.“

3. The CIA is not making public claims that Russia hacked the election. Several CIA veterans, in fact, have urged caution about the leaked reports. As Newsweek reports: “‘I am not saying that I don’t think Russia did this,’ Nada Bakos, a top former CIA counterterrorism officer tells Newsweek, in a typical comment. ‘My main concern is that we will rush to judgment.

4. Despite left-wing “fake news,” there is no evidence Russian hackers actually distorted the voting process. The most that the CIA is alleging is that the Russians may have helped hack of the Democratic National Committee emails, as well as (possibly) the emails of Hillary Clinton campaign chaiman John Podesta. There is zero evidence Russian hackers messed with voting.

5. The Obama administration has a history of manipulating intelligence for political gain. The most under-reported scandal of Obama’s presidency was the CENTCOM scandal, in which it emerged that “senior U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) leaders manipulated intelligence assessments in 2014 and 2015 to make it appear that President Barack Obama is winning the war against the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).”

6. Julian Assange and Wikileaks have vigorously denied that the Russians were involved in Wikileaks’ disclosures. Of the Democratic National Committee emails, Assange said: “That is the circumstantial evidence that some Russian, or someone who wanted to make them look like a Russian, was involved, with these other media organizations.

7. The fact that the Russians might constantly be trying to hack U.S. systems, and might even specifically have targeted the election, does not prove that they succeeded. Nor does it prove that they tipped the election to Trump even if they had some effect.

8. Foreign interference in elections is nothing new — and the Obama administration is a prime culprit. In 2015, the Obama administration made a strenuous and not-terribly-well-hidden effort to swing the Israeli elections toward the opposition and away from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. OBAMA'S EFFORTS HAD NO EFFECT ON THE ISRAELI ELECTION. If t had any effect, it was to make Israelis vote in larger numbers for Netanyahu - sort of like his effect on supporters for Trump in 2016.

9. What would the consequences of allowing undue Russian influence in our elections be, exactly? Would we yield primacy in Eastern Europe to Vladimir Putin? Would we give up our plans for missile defense? Would we make deep unilateral cuts in our nuclear arsenal in exchange for flimsy concessions ? Would we tolerate a Russian land invasion of a friendly, pro-Western country? Would we cede the Middle East to Russian hegemony? Because Hillary Clinton and Obama already did that.

10. Occam’s razor: the simplest explanation for the “Russian hacking” story is that it is “fake news” that suits the left-wing media. It is not unknown for Russia to use false propaganda to affect public opinion in foreign countries. Nor is it unknown for the U.S. media to use bias, “fake news,” and outright lies to shift public opinion in this country. The current focus on Russian “hacking,” based on no new evidence and — again — zero evidence of tampering with the voting process.


10 Ways the CIA 'Russian Hacking' Story is Left-Wing 'Fake News'

 

[jc456]

Our friends on the left and in the media are desperate and this whole "Russians" thing is the political version of a "Hail Mary" pass in football

lowest percentage play out there!


Leftists and dems did not care when China and Russia were hacking our info and it actually endangered the lives of United States servicemen and spies

But now that their queen has been dethroned, THIS is a big deal

it's more than just a little amusing to watch

and, oh yeah, there is disagreement about the actual facts - imagine that!

Breaking: New CIA Source – Washington Post’s Russia Story “An Outright Lie”
Prolific investigative journalism website True Pundit, run by a gentleman who goes by the twitter handle Thomas Paine (@Thomas1774Paine), has been on the bleeding edge of newsflow throughout the election – breaking several stories himself, including the pending NYPD Weiner Laptop investigation before it was officially announced.


In a breaking story this evening, “CIA personnel with direct knowledge of the case” told True Pundit that the WaPo story was utter horseshit, and that there is nothing definitive about the hacks whatsoever.

So was it the Trump campaign or the RNC that did the hacking?

Since you claim it was not the Russians then who else would do it and why? Who got the advantage from the hacks and then leaks?

Why is it important to YOU that it was NOT the Russians?
Please tell us.

who did assange say it was? did you look that up yet? are you smart enough to do that investigation? you know assange stated it wasn't the russians right? please say you know this and aren't a stoop!

 

[jc456]

Did the hacks happen or not?

good question, do you know?

 

[BlindBoo]

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

While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.

The position of the ODNI, which oversees the 17 agency-strong U.S. intelligence community, could give Trump fresh ammunition to dispute the CIA assessment, which he rejected as "ridiculous" in weekend remarks, and press his assertion that no evidence implicates Russia in the cyber attacks.

Trump's rejection of the CIA's judgment marks the latest in a string of disputes over Russia's international conduct that have erupted between the president-elect and the intelligence community he will soon command.

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

Clapper who heads the ODNI announce that Russia was behind the hack of DNC and Podesta in Oct.
What he claims now is they have no hard proof of intent, like an actual operative.

 

[jc456]

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

While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.

The position of the ODNI, which oversees the 17 agency-strong U.S. intelligence community, could give Trump fresh ammunition to dispute the CIA assessment, which he rejected as "ridiculous" in weekend remarks, and press his assertion that no evidence implicates Russia in the cyber attacks.

Trump's rejection of the CIA's judgment marks the latest in a string of disputes over Russia's international conduct that have erupted between the president-elect and the intelligence community he will soon command.

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

Clapper who heads the ODNI announce that Russia was behind the hack of DNC and Podesta in Oct.
What he claims now is they have no hard proof of intent, like an actual operative.

well how is that influence?

 

[jon_berzerk]

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

While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.

The position of the ODNI, which oversees the 17 agency-strong U.S. intelligence community, could give Trump fresh ammunition to dispute the CIA assessment, which he rejected as "ridiculous" in weekend remarks, and press his assertion that no evidence implicates Russia in the cyber attacks.

Trump's rejection of the CIA's judgment marks the latest in a string of disputes over Russia's international conduct that have erupted between the president-elect and the intelligence community he will soon command.

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

Clapper who heads the ODNI announce that Russia was behind the hack of DNC and Podesta in Oct.
What he claims now is they have no hard proof of intent, like an actual operative.

well how is that influence?

it is not

 

[easyt65]

So if you are now taking the stance that you dont know if it happened or not why are you saying people dont agree on something you dont know if it happened at all?

Its clear you believe we were hacked because all your defenses were saying people didnt agree over the purpose of the hacks.

You know, trying to keep up with your squirming, spinning, and crap is exhausting.

I am and have said Libs have lost their f*ing minds continuing with this 'The Russians hacked the election' - THERE IS NO PROOF WHATSOEVER THAT HAPPENED! NONE!

I continue to point that FACT out, despite the 'Fake News' media and the Liberals parroting them, continuing to demonize Trump as an 'accomplice' to something that has not even been proven to have happened.

You keep seemingly attacking me for wanting to actually wait and find out all the facts 1st before jumping over the edge.

Do you realize YOU have just ASSIGNED your own answer FOR ME to the question you posed to me?! If you want to have a 2-way conversation with yourself, put a sock on your hand, draw eyes and a mouth, and have at it, but you don't speak FOR me.

 

[hadit]

Our friends on the left and in the media are desperate and this whole "Russians" thing is the political version of a "Hail Mary" pass in football

The libs on this board are just as desperate, continuing to parrot the 'FAKE NEWS'.

I bet you believe this "New CIA Source", don't you?

When two equally believable (or unbelievable) sources conflict, it's kind of hard to take either one seriously, isn't it? Thus, I have a hard time getting all excited about the whole "The Russians made everybody vote Republican" bit.