I need an answer to this question..

[flacaltenn]

Red scare tactics? That's pretty low.

I was thinking that Republicans deny Russia's involvement because it benefitted them. That red scare bs is right wing nonsense. So you think it's bad when Republicans do that too?

Pretending Russia was involved to begin with benefits the DNC. No one else. Is this you :Why are you Russian?

Just because you're playing politics doesn't mean we are too. Wake up. It's over. You won, even if Russia did help you. We understand why Russia prefers trump and so do you.

Stop being intellectually dishonest

I didn't vote for Trump. This is not a game. The one that is dishonest here is you. I don't understand how a group of normally intelligent people that have knowledge having read history how Red Scare tactics work and recognize scare tactics when war hawks on the other "team" can let this go down. I really don't. You should have seen this one from the get go.

You still don't believe Russia was involved? I heard we spied on them celebrating and congratulating each other.

You don't think we spied on them?

Who'd you vote for? Anyone but Hillary and democratic senators, governors and house members was a mistake imo

I KNOW Russia spied on the election. I'd be disappointed in them if they didn't. We ALL spy on other nation states. OUR GUYS were caught tapping Angela Merkel's phone for giggles and grins. There's a world of difference in how that intel gets used. And it is not "normal" for it to released publicly. That's the question actually. WHO LEAKED it.

And all these "expert opinions" are based on "patterns of Russian behavior" and there was NO INTEREST from these agencies at the time to JUMP IN and examine physical evidence. EVEN AFTER THE PUBLIC was told it appeared to be a "state actor". That's fishy as hell...

 

[flacaltenn]

This entire Russian case of the vapors is nothing but an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of president elect Trump. That's why Obama sat in the White House with his thumb up his ass for months and didn't do anything about it until AFTER Trump won, and has yet to do squat about China hacking us even worse.

Democrats are lying dishonest scum that's all you really need to know.

Was he president elect in May, when they first identified the hackers? No.

That's the point of this thread. They STILL had thumbs up asses because it appears with all the sirens and alarms going off -- not a SINGLE FEDERAL counter hack group was tasked to examine the DNC server, Podesta's phone --- or assign manpower to counter espionage efforts. The Admin and these agencies were on snooze.. RIGHT UP until election night. When it was WAAAAY too late for anyone credible to examine the actual physical evidence.

 

[flacaltenn]

Since there are so many "unanswered questions" for the fans of Putin's Puppet, I guess an independent investigation into the matter is called for, yes? Why is the Congressional GOP leadership opposed to an independent investigation into the matter?

the question remains, if the operatives doing the hacking were not Russian operatives, then who did it?

RNC operatives? Trump operatives?

Who is DCLeaks.com? Who is the owner and who have they gone after and for what gain? It was created in June 2016 to get the DNC/Podesta leaks, to wikileaks.

Who is the mutual friend of Julian Assange and the Republican/Trump operative Roger Stone that could inform Stone on the wikileaks on Podesta two months before wikileaks, leaked them?

Definitely many unanswered questions.

Congress should have an independent investigation!

There is no relationship between Stone and Assange. Stone hedged a bet and lost his ass. You know this. Assange was not associated with the Republicans or Trump.

DC Leaks is a scam site with a number that has been associated with other scam sites since at least 2008 and nobody paid attention to DC Leaks. Assange has nothing to do with that site.

We don't know that...but an independent investigation into the matter should help resolve these unanswered questions don't you think? Ya'll were willing to have, how many was it, 12 independent investigations into Benghazi, but not one into a foreign power trying to influence our elections?

I'm a liberal. Shove that Ya'll.

You do know it.

My most sincere apologies. I take back that "ya'll". How about "We've had something like a dozen independent investigations into Benghazi...how about at least one into Russia trying to influence our national elections?"

Better?

Unlike Benghazi where the Admin initially tried to muzzle the witnesses that defended the compounds, there was testimony and evidence. Even tho it was CNN and NOT govt agents that picked up a burned copy of the ambassor's private notes off the floor of the compound. Again THERE -- the alarm bells went off and the RESPONSE to PRESERVE the evidence did not happen.

In THIS CASE -- NO evidence appears to have been directly picked up or examined by ANY of the agencies weighing in with opinions. It's a massive FAILURE of leadership and a pattern of being lax about investigating things that blow up later on.. Evidently, the scandal has to include something about a movie. Because when a Sony MOVIE caused the hack or an obscure amateur movie "caused" Benghazi -- ALL hands are on deck..

 

[12icer]

Yeah I believe that,, Guess where the majority of tweets came from!!! not her constituents??? where then,,, Why not go to the system that covered the MOST people in the country? The one we had BEFORE oshitcare.

The FBI never even looked at some of the emails in the cases, and did not even ask for them. The DOJ had already decided not to follow up on any actionable evidence I'm the "Been gay about getting away" case

 

[flacaltenn]

There is no relationship between Stone and Assange. Stone hedged a bet and lost his ass. You know this. Assange was not associated with the Republicans or Trump.

DC Leaks is a scam site with a number that has been associated with other scam sites since at least 2008 and nobody paid attention to DC Leaks. Assange has nothing to do with that site.

We don't know that...but an independent investigation into the matter should help resolve these unanswered questions don't you think? Ya'll were willing to have, how many was it, 12 independent investigations into Benghazi, but not one into a foreign power trying to influence our elections?

I'm a liberal. Shove that Ya'll.

You do know it.

My most sincere apologies. I take back that "ya'll". How about "We've had something like a dozen independent investigations into Benghazi...how about at least one into Russia trying to influence our national elections?"

Better?

Much. They did not influence our elections.

The company was registered in Australia. The server was in Malaysia. The tech number has been around since 2008 and has been known to be used for scam sites. You are being led around in circles.
Again. Russia did not "influence" anything.

Really? If the hacking by the Russians and the subsequent Wikileaks did not influence the election in any way, why did the Trump team do nothing but bring up the Wikileaks during the months of September and October?

Because Wikileaks was collating all the Clinton emails from her misadventures with the server designed to AVOID normal security comm channels. All of the FOIA requests for THAT stuff -- landed on WikiLeaks. 3rd bad IT decision by the Dems in that election. They really don't have a clue about "cyber security" do they?

BTW -- Trump MISSED the perfect opportunity for a knock-out punch and a called election when he let Ms. Clintstone pontificate on "what America needs to do to combat cyber threats" in the 2nd (3rd?) debate. I was choking on my beer when she prattled on about "protecting national security and state secrets" like she never actually DID any of what she did. Should have pounded her right there. Election over... He missed it... A lot of senior moments in those debates.

 

[flacaltenn]

Which of the many Intel Agencies that are making claims about Russian hacking have EVER been granted access to the DNC servers in question?

I ASK THAT because the FBI NEVER got access to the DNC servers. Instead the DNC hire CrowdStrike. Which is almost EXCLUSIVELY funded by Google. The same Google who was on the WHouse guest login far more than any other commercial organization. And all of the analysis I've seen is largely based on THEIR opinions.

Did anyone ask the lying bastard DNI -- if they EVER got direct access to the DNC servers for forensics? If so WHEN? And was all the forensic data preserved?

Let's see...The last time the FBI did forensic analysis of computer/server data, it determined, based on what it found, that Hillary Clinton didn't intend to violate the Espionage Act. And how well was that received by various segments of the nation's populace? How well did you receive it? I don't and I'm not going to plumb your history to find out.

Now, after months of Trump denying and discrediting the USIC's credibility, why should it matter whether any of them gained access to DNC servers? Let's be real. It took Trump until late 2016 to admit that Obama was born in the U.S., that even after the man's birth certificate was released in 2011.

In these post-truth Trump times, what is seems to make no difference. At least it hasn't since June 2015. What's going to make it matter now?

Since I worked in security areas of the govt before, I already KNEW the outcome. And Comey was signaling it when he passed on indictment. I was initially mad, but his testimony in hearings drew me back to HIS side when he was specifically asked --- "What would happen to an employee in the FBI who did what Ms BillyJeff did?"

The answer is what I was telling EVERYBODY for months on USMB and elsewhere. Her clearances SHOULD HAVE been yanked PERMANENTLY (which the FBI has the power to do, but is normally done by the agency in which the crime occurred).. The person would be FIRED, demoted, transferred or sanctioned, pay docked possibly, a proclamation that they would be never be cleared again, etc.. I was telling folks that these things are handled INTERNALLY to the agency or the contractor in which they occur. Because a PUBLIC prosecution can do more damage to security details of the mess and the RULES for conducting a Super Secret trial are very complex.

So all I ever wanted was for clearances to be yanked, told she's never be eligible for new ones and a letter of sanction from her employer or Congress in this case because she was a Cabinet Member at the time of the crime.

I Believe that if you searched my content, you'd find folks laughing at me and big fanatical leftists funnying my posts. But months later -- Comey told everyone the same thing I was saying, before even the MEDIA caught on to "what appropriate punishments" are taken..

 

[LoneLaugher]

Can the OP provide the class with an expert opinion stating that it is even necessary to physically examine the DNC server in order to come to the conclusion that Putin and Russia are responsible for the hack?

And I don't mean YOUR opinion. Who, besides you, is making this claim? Please link to their discussion.

Thanks.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Which of the many Intel Agencies that are making claims about Russian hacking have EVER been granted access to the DNC servers in question?

I ASK THAT because the FBI NEVER got access to the DNC servers. Instead the DNC hire CrowdStrike. Which is almost EXCLUSIVELY funded by Google. The same Google who was on the WHouse guest login far more than any other commercial organization. And all of the analysis I've seen is largely based on THEIR opinions.

Did anyone ask the lying bastard DNI -- if they EVER got direct access to the DNC servers for forensics? If so WHEN? And was all the forensic data preserved?

Let's see...The last time the FBI did forensic analysis of computer/server data, it determined, based on what it found, that Hillary Clinton didn't intend to violate the Espionage Act. And how well was that received by various segments of the nation's populace? How well did you receive it? I don't and I'm not going to plumb your history to find out.

Now, after months of Trump denying and discrediting the USIC's credibility, why should it matter whether any of them gained access to DNC servers? Let's be real. It took Trump until late 2016 to admit that Obama was born in the U.S., that even after the man's birth certificate was released in 2011.

In these post-truth Trump times, what is seems to make no difference. At least it hasn't since June 2015. What's going to make it matter now?

Since I worked in security areas of the govt before, I already KNEW the outcome. And Comey was signaling it when he passed on indictment. I was initially mad, but his testimony in hearings drew me back to HIS side when he was specifically asked --- "What would happen to an employee in the FBI who did what Ms BillyJeff did?"

The answer is what I was telling EVERYBODY for months on USMB and elsewhere. Her clearances SHOULD HAVE been yanked PERMANENTLY (which the FBI has the power to do, but is normally done by the agency in which the crime occurred).. The person would be FIRED, demoted, transferred or sanctioned, pay docked possibly, a proclamation that they would be never be cleared again, etc.. I was telling folks that these things are handled INTERNALLY to the agency or the contractor in which they occur. Because a PUBLIC prosecution can do more damage to security details of the mess and the RULES for conducting a Super Secret trial are very complex.

So all I ever wanted was for clearances to be yanked, told she's never be eligible for new ones and a letter of sanction from her employer or Congress in this case because she was a Cabinet Member at the time of the crime.

I Believe that if you searched my content, you'd find folks laughing at me and big fanatical leftists funnying my posts. But months later -- Comey told everyone the same thing I was saying, before even the MEDIA caught on to "what appropriate punishments" are taken..

Oh boy!! You really don't like Hillary Clinton and you don't think she should have security clearance. What a revelation!

 

[LoneLaugher]

the question remains, if the operatives doing the hacking were not Russian operatives, then who did it?

RNC operatives? Trump operatives?

Who is DCLeaks.com? Who is the owner and who have they gone after and for what gain? It was created in June 2016 to get the DNC/Podesta leaks, to wikileaks.

Who is the mutual friend of Julian Assange and the Republican/Trump operative Roger Stone that could inform Stone on the wikileaks on Podesta two months before wikileaks, leaked them?

Definitely many unanswered questions.

Congress should have an independent investigation!

There is no relationship between Stone and Assange. Stone hedged a bet and lost his ass. You know this. Assange was not associated with the Republicans or Trump.

DC Leaks is a scam site with a number that has been associated with other scam sites since at least 2008 and nobody paid attention to DC Leaks. Assange has nothing to do with that site.

We don't know that...but an independent investigation into the matter should help resolve these unanswered questions don't you think? Ya'll were willing to have, how many was it, 12 independent investigations into Benghazi, but not one into a foreign power trying to influence our elections?

I'm a liberal. Shove that Ya'll.

You do know it.

My most sincere apologies. I take back that "ya'll". How about "We've had something like a dozen independent investigations into Benghazi...how about at least one into Russia trying to influence our national elections?"

Better?

Unlike Benghazi where the Admin initially tried to muzzle the witnesses that defended the compounds, there was testimony and evidence. Even tho it was CNN and NOT govt agents that picked up a burned copy of the ambassor's private notes off the floor of the compound. Again THERE -- the alarm bells went off and the RESPONSE to PRESERVE the evidence did not happen.

In THIS CASE -- NO evidence appears to have been directly picked up or examined by ANY of the agencies weighing in with opinions. It's a massive FAILURE of leadership and a pattern of being lax about investigating things that blow up later on.. Evidently, the scandal has to include something about a movie. Because when a Sony MOVIE caused the hack or an obscure amateur movie "caused" Benghazi -- ALL hands are on deck..

Benghazi? Really?

 

[Care4all]

This entire Russian case of the vapors is nothing but an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of president elect Trump. That's why Obama sat in the White House with his thumb up his ass for months and didn't do anything about it until AFTER Trump won, and has yet to do squat about China hacking us even worse.

Democrats are lying dishonest scum that's all you really need to know.

Was he president elect in May, when they first identified the hackers? No.

That's the point of this thread. They STILL had thumbs up asses because it appears with all the sirens and alarms going off -- not a SINGLE FEDERAL counter hack group was tasked to examine the DNC server, Podesta's phone --- or assign manpower to counter espionage efforts. The Admin and these agencies were on snooze.. RIGHT UP until election night. When it was WAAAAY too late for anyone credible to examine the actual physical evidence.

all kinds of alarms were sounded early october, and mid August....the media had the leaks themselves and the access hollywood tapes, and alicia macado etc to make their money off of so they dropped the stories on the russians and focused on their other money makers...

Trump is who has made this an issue with his tweets and comments, he could have not bashed intelligence agents and agencies in public and all the


k i s s i n g - in a tree, with Putin and Assange, is all smoke and mirrors causing alarm and division of the masses and media, so not to focus on his actual finances and involvement with the Russians and mob, his conflicts of interest throughout the world, his controversial cabinet picks, his family involvement in our govt, his tax returns, his breaking the emolument rule in the Constitution etc etc etc....

he by no means is stupid, he just plays stupid....but for a REASON.

 

[JustAnotherNut]

I agree with the OP. These are questions that should be asked and answered. Just what good is having 17 intel agencies, if they're not going to do their jobs, but outsource such top secret national security info to private companies? How can any legal system stand without directly examining evidence without outside influence?
In any crime, doesn't the police secure a scene, confiscate all evidence to protect from being tainted, do a thorough investigation into the matter before coming to a conclusion? Why wouldn't the FBI, CIA & NSA do the same? Especially with matters of national security?
This is comparable to handing over a murder investigation to the janitor and the police just accepting what he says without checking it themselves.

To add another similar but different question.....WHY didn't those same intel agencies do their own investigations &/or get first access to those servers? Even if they did outsource to who? Cloudstrike? Why didn't they CONFIRM their findings before accepting it.

 

[BluesLegend]

the question remains, if the operatives doing the hacking were not Russian operatives, then who did it?

RNC operatives? Trump operatives?

Who is DCLeaks.com? Who is the owner and who have they gone after and for what gain? It was created in June 2016 to get the DNC/Podesta leaks, to wikileaks.

Who is the mutual friend of Julian Assange and the Republican/Trump operative Roger Stone that could inform Stone on the wikileaks on Podesta two months before wikileaks, leaked them?

Definitely many unanswered questions.

Congress should have an independent investigation!

There is no relationship between Stone and Assange. Stone hedged a bet and lost his ass. You know this. Assange was not associated with the Republicans or Trump.

DC Leaks is a scam site with a number that has been associated with other scam sites since at least 2008 and nobody paid attention to DC Leaks. Assange has nothing to do with that site.

We don't know that...but an independent investigation into the matter should help resolve these unanswered questions don't you think? Ya'll were willing to have, how many was it, 12 independent investigations into Benghazi, but not one into a foreign power trying to influence our elections?

I'm a liberal. Shove that Ya'll.

You do know it.

My most sincere apologies. I take back that "ya'll". How about "We've had something like a dozen independent investigations into Benghazi...how about at least one into Russia trying to influence our national elections?"

Better?

Unlike Benghazi where the Admin initially tried to muzzle the witnesses that defended the compounds, there was testimony and evidence. Even tho it was CNN and NOT govt agents that picked up a burned copy of the ambassor's private notes off the floor of the compound. Again THERE -- the alarm bells went off and the RESPONSE to PRESERVE the evidence did not happen.

In THIS CASE -- NO evidence appears to have been directly picked up or examined by ANY of the agencies weighing in with opinions. It's a massive FAILURE of leadership and a pattern of being lax about investigating things that blow up later on.. Evidently, the scandal has to include something about a movie. Because when a Sony MOVIE caused the hack or an obscure amateur movie "caused" Benghazi -- ALL hands are on deck..

Did the Obama administration fail to act on the hacking because it only further highlighted how inept the Democrats security was? Obama thought Hillary was going to win, I think he was just trying to run out the clock on this problem.

 

[Care4all]

the dnc guy said they didn't get access to their system from the DNC cuz they never asked them....but who is to say the intelligence community didn't get a copy of the DNC System by getting it from the security firm they had hired, who copied the DNC files from their system IN ORDER for them to run their trace?

I too, wished we, the public were given more info, but rest assured, DJ Trump was given much much more and so were the intelligence committee members in congress and they ALL say the intelligence in the confidential status report was undeniable....both R's and D's.

 

[Lakhota]

Nawwww... There's no POSSIBLE reason why CrowdStrike was selected by the DNC to do the forensics.

A chart of lobbyists' White House visits reveals its close ties with Google

Please stop whining. The DNC is a private entity that has every right to handle this matter as it sees fit. All the bases have been covered in the Intelligence Report.

What did the report say?
The report said Russia's actions included hacking into the email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and individual Democrats including Mrs Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.

It said Russia had also used state-funded propaganda and paid "trolls" to make nasty comments on social media platforms:

"Moscow's influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations — such as cyber activity — with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or 'trolls'."

The report said the Russian effort was both political and personal.

"Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump."

The report said Mr Putin likely wanted to discredit Mrs Clinton because he blames her for inciting mass protests against his regime in 2011 and 2012, and resents her for disparaging comments she has made about him.

It found that when it appeared Mrs Clinton might well win the election, Mr Putin turned his focus to undermining her presidency:

"Moscow's approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia's understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency."

It said the Russian effort was the "boldest yet" intended to effect a US election.

"Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow's longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations."

The report said Republican affiliates had also been targeted but not to the same extent:

"Russia collected on some Republican-affiliated targets but did not conduct a comparable disclosure campaign."

There was no suggestion that Russia affected actual vote counting or tampered with ballot machines, the report said:

"DHS [Department of Homeland Security] assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying ... We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election."

The report also warned of future cyber attacks:

"We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes."

What does the US intelligence report into election hacking say?

No details there that CONFIRM that ANY US Intel agency actually conducted an investigation of evidence for the DNC "breach(es)" or Podesta's phone. Russian wanting to SURVEIL a US election is NOT NEWS. It's to be expected. I suspect 14 other countries did so as well..

Yeah, but how many other countries actually hacked and publicly distributed private DNC emails and employed state-funded Russian propaganda trolls and third-party intermediaries and paid social media users to discredit Hillary and influence the election on Trump's behalf?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Which of the many Intel Agencies that are making claims about Russian hacking have EVER been granted access to the DNC servers in question?

I ASK THAT because the FBI NEVER got access to the DNC servers. Instead the DNC hire CrowdStrike. Which is almost EXCLUSIVELY funded by Google. The same Google who was on the WHouse guest login far more than any other commercial organization. And all of the analysis I've seen is largely based on THEIR opinions.

Did anyone ask the lying bastard DNI -- if they EVER got direct access to the DNC servers for forensics? If so WHEN? And was all the forensic data preserved?

Let's see...The last time the FBI did forensic analysis of computer/server data, it determined, based on what it found, that Hillary Clinton didn't intend to violate the Espionage Act. And how well was that received by various segments of the nation's populace? How well did you receive it? I don't and I'm not going to plumb your history to find out.

Now, after months of Trump denying and discrediting the USIC's credibility, why should it matter whether any of them gained access to DNC servers? Let's be real. It took Trump until late 2016 to admit that Obama was born in the U.S., that even after the man's birth certificate was released in 2011.

In these post-truth Trump times, what is seems to make no difference. At least it hasn't since June 2015. What's going to make it matter now?

Since I worked in security areas of the govt before, I already KNEW the outcome. And Comey was signaling it when he passed on indictment. I was initially mad, but his testimony in hearings drew me back to HIS side when he was specifically asked --- "What would happen to an employee in the FBI who did what Ms BillyJeff did?"

The answer is what I was telling EVERYBODY for months on USMB and elsewhere. Her clearances SHOULD HAVE been yanked PERMANENTLY (which the FBI has the power to do, but is normally done by the agency in which the crime occurred).. The person would be FIRED, demoted, transferred or sanctioned, pay docked possibly, a proclamation that they would be never be cleared again, etc.. I was telling folks that these things are handled INTERNALLY to the agency or the contractor in which they occur. Because a PUBLIC prosecution can do more damage to security details of the mess and the RULES for conducting a Super Secret trial are very complex.

So all I ever wanted was for clearances to be yanked, told she's never be eligible for new ones and a letter of sanction from her employer or Congress in this case because she was a Cabinet Member at the time of the crime.

I Believe that if you searched my content, you'd find folks laughing at me and big fanatical leftists funnying my posts. But months later -- Comey told everyone the same thing I was saying, before even the MEDIA caught on to "what appropriate punishments" are taken..

TY. It was very nice of you to share the details of your stance on what punitive actions should have been taken. Sadly though, of all the questions I asked, the least consequential one is the one you addressed. (expand quote, see bold text)

 

[flacaltenn]

HG

Which of the many Intel Agencies that are making claims about Russian hacking have EVER been granted access to the DNC servers in question?

I ASK THAT because the FBI NEVER got access to the DNC servers. Instead the DNC hire CrowdStrike. Which is almost EXCLUSIVELY funded by Google. The same Google who was on the WHouse guest login far more than any other commercial organization. And all of the analysis I've seen is largely based on THEIR opinions.

Did anyone ask the lying bastard DNI -- if they EVER got direct access to the DNC servers for forensics? If so WHEN? And was all the forensic data preserved?

Let's see...The last time the FBI did forensic analysis of computer/server data, it determined, based on what it found, that Hillary Clinton didn't intend to violate the Espionage Act. And how well was that received by various segments of the nation's populace? How well did you receive it? I don't and I'm not going to plumb your history to find out.

Now, after months of Trump denying and discrediting the USIC's credibility, why should it matter whether any of them gained access to DNC servers? Let's be real. It took Trump until late 2016 to admit that Obama was born in the U.S., that even after the man's birth certificate was released in 2011.

In these post-truth Trump times, what is seems to make no difference. At least it hasn't since June 2015. What's going to make it matter now?

Since I worked in security areas of the govt before, I already KNEW the outcome. And Comey was signaling it when he passed on indictment. I was initially mad, but his testimony in hearings drew me back to HIS side when he was specifically asked --- "What would happen to an employee in the FBI who did what Ms BillyJeff did?"

The answer is what I was telling EVERYBODY for months on USMB and elsewhere. Her clearances SHOULD HAVE been yanked PERMANENTLY (which the FBI has the power to do, but is normally done by the agency in which the crime occurred).. The person would be FIRED, demoted, transferred or sanctioned, pay docked possibly, a proclamation that they would be never be cleared again, etc.. I was telling folks that these things are handled INTERNALLY to the agency or the contractor in which they occur. Because a PUBLIC prosecution can do more damage to security details of the mess and the RULES for conducting a Super Secret trial are very complex.

So all I ever wanted was for clearances to be yanked, told she's never be eligible for new ones and a letter of sanction from her employer or Congress in this case because she was a Cabinet Member at the time of the crime.

I Believe that if you searched my content, you'd find folks laughing at me and big fanatical leftists funnying my posts. But months later -- Comey told everyone the same thing I was saying, before even the MEDIA caught on to "what appropriate punishments" are taken..

Oh boy!! You really don't like Hillary Clinton and you don't think she should have security clearance. What a revelation!

Her clearances should have been yanked as soon as Comey made the speech in "non-indictment" that she was just too naive and incompetent to understand the security implications of purposely bypassing the normal APPROVED SECURE channels of communications for that job.

 

[flacaltenn]

Which of the many Intel Agencies that are making claims about Russian hacking have EVER been granted access to the DNC servers in question?

I ASK THAT because the FBI NEVER got access to the DNC servers. Instead the DNC hire CrowdStrike. Which is almost EXCLUSIVELY funded by Google. The same Google who was on the WHouse guest login far more than any other commercial organization. And all of the analysis I've seen is largely based on THEIR opinions.

Did anyone ask the lying bastard DNI -- if they EVER got direct access to the DNC servers for forensics? If so WHEN? And was all the forensic data preserved?

Let's see...The last time the FBI did forensic analysis of computer/server data, it determined, based on what it found, that Hillary Clinton didn't intend to violate the Espionage Act. And how well was that received by various segments of the nation's populace? How well did you receive it? I don't and I'm not going to plumb your history to find out.

Now, after months of Trump denying and discrediting the USIC's credibility, why should it matter whether any of them gained access to DNC servers? Let's be real. It took Trump until late 2016 to admit that Obama was born in the U.S., that even after the man's birth certificate was released in 2011.

In these post-truth Trump times, what is seems to make no difference. At least it hasn't since June 2015. What's going to make it matter now?

Since I worked in security areas of the govt before, I already KNEW the outcome. And Comey was signaling it when he passed on indictment. I was initially mad, but his testimony in hearings drew me back to HIS side when he was specifically asked --- "What would happen to an employee in the FBI who did what Ms BillyJeff did?"

The answer is what I was telling EVERYBODY for months on USMB and elsewhere. Her clearances SHOULD HAVE been yanked PERMANENTLY (which the FBI has the power to do, but is normally done by the agency in which the crime occurred).. The person would be FIRED, demoted, transferred or sanctioned, pay docked possibly, a proclamation that they would be never be cleared again, etc.. I was telling folks that these things are handled INTERNALLY to the agency or the contractor in which they occur. Because a PUBLIC prosecution can do more damage to security details of the mess and the RULES for conducting a Super Secret trial are very complex.

So all I ever wanted was for clearances to be yanked, told she's never be eligible for new ones and a letter of sanction from her employer or Congress in this case because she was a Cabinet Member at the time of the crime.

I Believe that if you searched my content, you'd find folks laughing at me and big fanatical leftists funnying my posts. But months later -- Comey told everyone the same thing I was saying, before even the MEDIA caught on to "what appropriate punishments" are taken..

TY. It was very nice of you to share the details of your stance on what punitive actions should have been taken. Sadly though, of all the questions I asked, the least consequential one is the one you addressed. (expand quote, see bold text)

Because I discount Trump's "opinion" of a USIC that he has YET TO MEET and evaluate. And because if this is such a fucking matter of National security NOW --- it was when it was it was happening also. The alarms should have triggered IMMEDIATE action to secure the evidence. And do evaluations that did not get filtered by the DNC...

I generally discount Trumps' "opinions" anyways. Until I see him actually leave the batter's box..

 

[flacaltenn]

I agree with the OP. These are questions that should be asked and answered. Just what good is having 17 intel agencies, if they're not going to do their jobs, but outsource such top secret national security info to private companies? How can any legal system stand without directly examining evidence without outside influence?
In any crime, doesn't the police secure a scene, confiscate all evidence to protect from being tainted, do a thorough investigation into the matter before coming to a conclusion? Why wouldn't the FBI, CIA & NSA do the same? Especially with matters of national security?
This is comparable to handing over a murder investigation to the janitor and the police just accepting what he says without checking it themselves.

To add another similar but different question.....WHY didn't those same intel agencies do their own investigations &/or get first access to those servers? Even if they did outsource to who? Cloudstrike? Why didn't they CONFIRM their findings before accepting it.

Those are just SOME of the more intelligent questions right there. And they are not being answered. Congress COULD subpoena all of the RAW CloudStrike reports to the DNC. But there's no guarantee that any WRITTEN reports are not filtered to present the image that the DNC wants to project.

And Congress SHOULD ask the question of who did the forensics on Podesta's phone as well. Have you heard that question asked and/or answered? That's why I'm in this thread. To be educated. Because I know a little bit about Intel operations and this stinks like a pig farm.

 

[flacaltenn]

Nawwww... There's no POSSIBLE reason why CrowdStrike was selected by the DNC to do the forensics.

A chart of lobbyists' White House visits reveals its close ties with Google

Please stop whining. The DNC is a private entity that has every right to handle this matter as it sees fit. All the bases have been covered in the Intelligence Report.

What did the report say?
The report said Russia's actions included hacking into the email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and individual Democrats including Mrs Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.

It said Russia had also used state-funded propaganda and paid "trolls" to make nasty comments on social media platforms:

"Moscow's influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations — such as cyber activity — with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or 'trolls'."

The report said the Russian effort was both political and personal.

"Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump."

The report said Mr Putin likely wanted to discredit Mrs Clinton because he blames her for inciting mass protests against his regime in 2011 and 2012, and resents her for disparaging comments she has made about him.

It found that when it appeared Mrs Clinton might well win the election, Mr Putin turned his focus to undermining her presidency:

"Moscow's approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia's understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency."

It said the Russian effort was the "boldest yet" intended to effect a US election.

"Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow's longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations."

The report said Republican affiliates had also been targeted but not to the same extent:

"Russia collected on some Republican-affiliated targets but did not conduct a comparable disclosure campaign."

There was no suggestion that Russia affected actual vote counting or tampered with ballot machines, the report said:

"DHS [Department of Homeland Security] assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying ... We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election."

The report also warned of future cyber attacks:

"We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes."

What does the US intelligence report into election hacking say?

No details there that CONFIRM that ANY US Intel agency actually conducted an investigation of evidence for the DNC "breach(es)" or Podesta's phone. Russian wanting to SURVEIL a US election is NOT NEWS. It's to be expected. I suspect 14 other countries did so as well..

Yeah, but how many other countries actually hacked and publicly distributed private DNC emails and employed state-funded Russian propaganda trolls and third-party intermediaries and paid social media users to discredit Hillary and influence the election on Trump's behalf?

We don't KNOW "how many other countries" or entities hacked into the election process -- do we? Because NOBODY in govt has examined the crime scene. My bet is SEVERAL gained access to Clinton's server and that emboldened them to try HARDER to "hack into the characters involved in the election". I'm fairly certain MANY state intel agencies couldn't BELIEVE how much secret stuff was available from her security bypass system..

It's like a fucking candy store for spies around these parts lately...

 

[flacaltenn]

There is no relationship between Stone and Assange. Stone hedged a bet and lost his ass. You know this. Assange was not associated with the Republicans or Trump.

DC Leaks is a scam site with a number that has been associated with other scam sites since at least 2008 and nobody paid attention to DC Leaks. Assange has nothing to do with that site.

We don't know that...but an independent investigation into the matter should help resolve these unanswered questions don't you think? Ya'll were willing to have, how many was it, 12 independent investigations into Benghazi, but not one into a foreign power trying to influence our elections?

I'm a liberal. Shove that Ya'll.

You do know it.

My most sincere apologies. I take back that "ya'll". How about "We've had something like a dozen independent investigations into Benghazi...how about at least one into Russia trying to influence our national elections?"

Better?

Unlike Benghazi where the Admin initially tried to muzzle the witnesses that defended the compounds, there was testimony and evidence. Even tho it was CNN and NOT govt agents that picked up a burned copy of the ambassor's private notes off the floor of the compound. Again THERE -- the alarm bells went off and the RESPONSE to PRESERVE the evidence did not happen.

In THIS CASE -- NO evidence appears to have been directly picked up or examined by ANY of the agencies weighing in with opinions. It's a massive FAILURE of leadership and a pattern of being lax about investigating things that blow up later on.. Evidently, the scandal has to include something about a movie. Because when a Sony MOVIE caused the hack or an obscure amateur movie "caused" Benghazi -- ALL hands are on deck..

Did the Obama administration fail to act on the hacking because it only further highlighted how inept the Democrats security was? Obama thought Hillary was going to win, I think he was just trying to run out the clock on this problem.

Probably part of the Calculus for NOT declaring an emergency when it looked like Clinton would certainly win. .That's all political. As is the decision to let the DNC examine themselves after KNOWING that another country was actively spying on the DNC and her election staff.