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

[The Original Tree]

Clinton, Trump clash on Russia's role in election
But the Director of National Intelligence, which speaks for the country’s 17 federal intelligence agencies, released a joint statement saying the intelligence community at large is confident that Russia is behind recent hacks into political organizations’ emails.

Interesting - YOU are saying that 'Politifact', that has been busted in the past lying for Obama, says the 'overseer' of all 17 agencies has declared the Russians hacked the elections. Of course the article you linked to is dated 19 OCTOBER.

It was reported YESTERDAY, however, "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."

Maybe you need to keep current on the news. Just sayin'...

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

Hey, check this out. Did Russia hack us yes or no?

No. There is no proof. Remember Obama fired people in the intelligence community with decades of experience, and replaced them with political yes men. There is 0 proof Russia hacked anything to date.

The thing I'd be worried about is The US having trade relations with China thanks to the trade deal Bill Clinton signed with China, and the trade deal Obama signed with South Korea, and The US having Korean and Chinese Spyware loaded on every phucking hard drive and SSD ever made coming out of those countries.

If we had any confirmation at all, we'd launch counter attacks and be engaged in Cyberwarfare already. But there is none. It is just rhetoric from a failed presidency and failed party.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Clinton, Trump clash on Russia's role in election
But the Director of National Intelligence, which speaks for the country’s 17 federal intelligence agencies, released a joint statement saying the intelligence community at large is confident that Russia is behind recent hacks into political organizations’ emails.

Interesting - YOU are saying that 'Politifact', that has been busted in the past lying for Obama, says the 'overseer' of all 17 agencies has declared the Russians hacked the elections. Of course the article you linked to is dated 19 OCTOBER.

It was reported YESTERDAY, however, "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."

Maybe you need to keep current on the news. Just sayin'...

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

Hey, check this out. Did Russia hack us yes or no?

No. There is no proof.

Except the proof

 

[Meathead]

Clinton, Trump clash on Russia's role in election
But the Director of National Intelligence, which speaks for the country’s 17 federal intelligence agencies, released a joint statement saying the intelligence community at large is confident that Russia is behind recent hacks into political organizations’ emails.

Interesting - YOU are saying that 'Politifact', that has been busted in the past lying for Obama, says the 'overseer' of all 17 agencies has declared the Russians hacked the elections. Of course the article you linked to is dated 19 OCTOBER.

It was reported YESTERDAY, however, "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."

Maybe you need to keep current on the news. Just sayin'...

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

Hey, check this out. Did Russia hack us yes or no?

No. There is no proof.

Except the proof

"Sources"? Suck it up buttercup!

 

[easyt65]

Except the proof

You and the FAKE NEWS media keep screaming that there iS definitive proof the Russians hacked our elections. Here is your opportunity to prove it - you have a captive audience: SHOW US THE DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE.

 

[easyt65]

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 — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.” In other words, someone only decided after Trump won that the accusation was worth making.

The “evidence” that the CIA has gathered is inconclusive. The FBI also disagrees with some of the CIA’s conclusions about Russia’s motives. “While lawmakers were seemingly united on the need to present a strong bipartisan response, the FBI and CIA gave lawmakers differing accounts on Russia’s motives, according to The Post,” The Hill reported on Sunday.

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


PLEASE prove me wrong - PROVIDE THE SPECIFIC, DEFINITIVE PROOF THAT THE RUSSIANS HACKED OUR ELECTIONS....PROVIDE THE MISSING EVIDENCE THE CIA DOES NOT HAVE THAT WILL DEFINITIVELY PROVE IT!

 

[miketx]

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.

Everyone don't know jack, least of all you lying fools.

 

[Russ Alllah Gehry]

Breaking News Exclusive: This OP is BS

 

[easyt65]

"The specifics of the CIA briefing is extremely important here, and as it stands there is no evidence (yet) of Kremlin officials directing the identified hackers."

http://thedailybanter.com/2016/12/definitive-proof-of-russian-hacking/

 

[easyt65]

T"here is still no such evidence for any of these claims..."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...dence/&usg=AFQjCNHZ7qmg1ROqwqh62yV-OPjCtAOzJw

 

[BlindBoo]

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations.

If only that were true Libs lives would be so much better. Unfortunately THE FACT IS, as I showed in the story/link I posted, the overseers of the Intel community said YESTERDAY they don't buy the whole CIA story.

Who do you suppose the ODNI is?

I'll give you a hint. They are the overseers of the intelligence community. And this is what they said about the hacking way back on Oct. 7.

Joint DHS and ODNI Election Security Statement

The only thing they don't agree with the CIA on is that there is no hard evidence with regards to intent to help the Groper win.

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

well this:
"The only thing they don't agree with the CIA on is that there is no hard evidence with regards to intent to help the Groper win."

Is what the current news is saying and it isn't true at all. they said so. you agree? so what other point is there now?

You sound very confused by it all.

I am, see all voting machines are offline. so I don't see how anyone can hack votes. See that would be interference.

That would be tampering with the vote. Interfering is a broader term.

Definition of INTERFERE

 

[easyt65]

"Buried in the Post’s Sept. 5th story about the investigation into Russian meddling was an interesting nugget of information — there is no proof of Russian interference."


http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/blogs...rats-using-putin-russia-to-delegitimize-trump

 

[BlindBoo]

"The specifics of the CIA briefing is extremely important here, and as it stands there is no evidence (yet) of Kremlin officials directing the identified hackers."

http://thedailybanter.com/2016/12/definitive-proof-of-russian-hacking/

Hence the call to declassify the briefing Congress got in September. But till then I'll side with the American CIA over Russian KGB or whatever they call themselves.

 

[Lewdog]

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 — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.” In other words, someone only decided after Trump won that the accusation was worth making.

The “evidence” that the CIA has gathered is inconclusive. The FBI also disagrees with some of the CIA’s conclusions about Russia’s motives. “While lawmakers were seemingly united on the need to present a strong bipartisan response, the FBI and CIA gave lawmakers differing accounts on Russia’s motives, according to The Post,” The Hill reported on Sunday.

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


PLEASE prove me wrong - PROVIDE THE SPECIFIC, DEFINITIVE PROOF THAT THE RUSSIANS HACKED OUR ELECTIONS....PROVIDE THE MISSING EVIDENCE THE CIA DOES NOT HAVE THAT WILL DEFINITIVELY PROVE IT!

Again, how can we provide the proof that the CIA doesn't have, if we don't know what proof the CIA does have? How about you show proof they didn't do it? Isn't that how things work in Trumpworld? The CIA made a statement that the Russians did it, now you provide proof they didn't.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

You also notice in your above quote it says "motives?" How many times does this have to be pointed out? They aren't arguing whether the hack actually happened, but over the motives. So yes, the Russians didn't send a note to the CIA or FBI saying, "Hey we are going to hack your election process and do it so that Trump gets elected..." Yet, out of the hacking that occurred and what was released, it doesn't take a fucking rocket scientist to see it was all one-sided against Clinton, in order to get Trump elected.

 

[Contumacious]

"Buried in the Post’s Sept. 5th story about the investigation into Russian meddling was an interesting nugget of information — there is no proof of Russian interference."


Democrats using Putin, Russia to delegitimize Trump

No there isn't


The NSA is able to identify both the sender and recipient when hacking is involved. Why aren't they doing it?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

.

 

[easyt65]

Again, how can we provide the proof that the CIA doesn't have, if we don't know what proof the CIA does have?

What evidence the CIA possesses has already been explained by the FBI (in links provided) - 'circumstantial evidence'.

Go to the UN with 'circumstantial evidence' and accuse Russia of hacking our elections - you will be laughed off the floor.

Try publicly ordering a military Cyber Attack against Russia, which is what Obama almost did, and see what that gets you from both the International Community and Putin.

 

[Contumacious]

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 — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.” In other words, someone only decided after Trump won that the accusation was worth making.

The “evidence” that the CIA has gathered is inconclusive. The FBI also disagrees with some of the CIA’s conclusions about Russia’s motives. “While lawmakers were seemingly united on the need to present a strong bipartisan response, the FBI and CIA gave lawmakers differing accounts on Russia’s motives, according to The Post,” The Hill reported on Sunday.

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


PLEASE prove me wrong - PROVIDE THE SPECIFIC, DEFINITIVE PROOF THAT THE RUSSIANS HACKED OUR ELECTIONS....PROVIDE THE MISSING EVIDENCE THE CIA DOES NOT HAVE THAT WILL DEFINITIVELY PROVE IT!

Again, how can we provide the proof that the CIA doesn't have, if we don't know what proof the CIA does have? How about you show proof they didn't do it? Isn't that how things work in Trumpworld? The CIA made a statement that the Russians did it, now you provide proof they didn't.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

You also notice in your above quote it says "motives?" How many times does this have to be pointed out? They aren't arguing whether the hack actually happened, but over the motives. So yes, the Russians didn't send a note to the CIA or FBI saying, "Hey we are going to hack your election process and do it so that Trump gets elected..." Yet, out of the hacking that occurred and what was released, it doesn't take a fucking rocket scientist to see it was all one-sided against Clinton, in order to get Trump elected.

Was the information "LEAKED" or "HACKED"


If an informant LEAKED information , the recipient of that information can do with it whatever it chooses

If the information was HACKED then the NSA would know both the hacker and the hackee

If they have to speculate then there was no hacking .


.

 

[easyt65]

"Backed by the Obama White House, Clinton and the media felt they had a green light to keep pressing ahead with blaming Russia – not only for the controversial DNC leaks, but also for hacking into US election systems in Arizona – a charge devoid of any evidence other than innuendo and speculation. The media’s coverage on this issue was deceptive from the onset. In a leading news release, entitled,“Russian hackers targeted Arizona election system,” we can see how after the cock-sure headline, the first paragraph would always sound definitive:

Hackers targeted voter registration systems in Illinois and Arizona, and the FBI alerted Arizona officials in June that Russians were behind the assault on the election system in that state.

But then by the time you advanced down the story, the report would quickly retreat into a zone of uncertainty:

The bureau described the threat as “credible” and significant, “an eight on a scale of one to 10,” Matt Roberts, a spokesman for Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan (R), said Monday. As a result, Reagan shut down the state’s voter registration system for nearly a week.

And then, down to almost nothing…

It turned out that the hackers had not compromised the state system or even any county system. They had, however, stolen the username and password of a single election official in Gila County.

At no point was any evidence ever given. Only ambiguous statements like, “Cyber security officials agree that this looks very much like a Russian government-directed hack.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillar...e-biggest-lie-of-this-election-season/5554412

 

[easyt65]

Was the information "LEAKED" or "HACKED"

Can you actually 'LEAK' an election?

It seems libs are getting the HACKED HILLARY E-MAIL' SCANDAL confused with the FAKE NEWS ' RUSSIAN HACKED US ELECTION' tale.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

dig this hillary hack that works for the cia
His comment if the US interfered in other countries election process was hilarious.

Ex-CIA operative: We may need a new vote - CNN Video

If there is a revote, Trump will bury hilly so deep, her bleat won't be heard.

 

[francoHFW]

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.

No evidence Dems did anything but e-mail BSing, dupe. Bernie says so. Thank Putin and Comey for your election win.