I need an answer to this question..

[radical right]

That POS Public Relations document was NEVER "a classified Intel Report". It was written for POLITICAL expediency.

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

 

[flacaltenn]

That POS Public Relations document was NEVER "a classified Intel Report". It was written for POLITICAL expediency.

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

 

[Lewdog]

That POS Public Relations document was NEVER "a classified Intel Report". It was written for POLITICAL expediency.

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

Just because someone cuts the check doesn't mean that the integrity of the third party is invalid. Crowdstrike has a stellar performance history.

 

[radical right]

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

The FBI / Homeland Security never checked any of the 21 state election database servers the russians hacked into. But the NSA collected proof of who breeched their servers before the states even knew they were hacked.

Why didn't they look at the state servers? Or the 41 state servers the russians tried to hack into?

 

[flacaltenn]

That POS Public Relations document was NEVER "a classified Intel Report". It was written for POLITICAL expediency.

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

Just because someone cuts the check doesn't mean that the integrity of the third party is invalid. Crowdstrike has a stellar performance history.

How OLD was this "stellar performance"? And who;'s money set that company up in business? The same one that visited the WH over 350 times during the BHO admin????

You cut the check == YOU control what people get to know. How many OTHER "hacks" occurred on those machines? Don't tell me that's the ONLY traces they found.

 

[radical right]

Just because someone cuts the check doesn't mean that the integrity of the third party is invalid. Crowdstrike has a stellar performance history.

Maybre you have a point. Trump pays Jeff Sessions check, and can fire him for any reason. Therefore we can't trust anything Jeff Sessions says or does, because it's totally suspect as being purely political.

Same with the DNI, head of the CIA, NSA, they're all agents of Trump.

 

[radical right]

How OLD was this "stellar performance"? And who;'s money set that company up in business?

Jeff Sessions is paid by Trump, who holds the pink slip, making anything Sessions says or does, political, and suspect. Right?

 

[flacaltenn]

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

The FBI / Homeland Security never checked any of the 21 state election database servers the russians hacked into. But the NSA collected proof of who breeched their servers before the states even knew they were hacked.

Why didn't they look at the state servers? Or the 41 state servers the russians tried to hack into?

You're out of your league here. NSA does not HAVE a charter to snoop domestically. The FBI does. And they have their OWN Counter Cyber group.. Quit winging it..

 

[Aletheia4u]

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?

Soros is the only one who has been the puppet master for all of them. That is qhy he wants President Trump out of the picture. He cannot control him because of President Trump's moral upbringing.


Soros had been trading shares of Google since prior to 2007 but had completely sold out in the second quarter of 2011. He then bought 1,126 shares in the third quarter of 2011 at about $550 per share. In the fourth quarter, he bought his largest stake to date — 258,900 shares at about $592, for a total investment of $154 million. Google is now his fifth largest holding, with 7.3% of his portfolio. George Soros Buys Google and Comverse Tech

George Soros in December donated $6 million to the leading super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, marking the return of the billionaire financier as among the biggest givers in all of American politics. George Soros donates $8 million to boost Hillary

Why is President Obama Meeting With George Soros, Far-Left Bloggers?

Billionaire George Soros funds $15M effort to stop Trump, mobilize Latinos

 

[Lewdog]

That POS Public Relations document was NEVER "a classified Intel Report". It was written for POLITICAL expediency.

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

Just because someone cuts the check doesn't mean that the integrity of the third party is invalid. Crowdstrike has a stellar performance history.

How OLD was this "stellar performance"? And who;'s money set that company up in business? The same one that visited the WH over 350 times during the BHO admin????

You cut the check == YOU control what people get to know. How many OTHER "hacks" occurred on those machines? Don't tell me that's the ONLY traces they found.

It's had a stellar report card ever since it has been in business. And even before that, the guy had a company with another guy, and he had a stellar record there before they parted ways.

It's not always that who cuts the check has influence. For example when I did my internship with the PI. He said that when people and companies pay him to do a job, he reports back what he finds, even if it isn't what the company wants to hear. For example an motor accident... interviewing an eye witness and them saying something the corroborates the story of the other party... he doesn't leave that out, he tells them.

 

[radical right]

You're out of your league here. NSA does not HAVE a charter to snoop domestically. The FBI does. And they have their OWN Counter Cyber group.. Quit winging it..

The FBI can't snoop without a warrant. The NSA has FISA permission to listen to everything, and filter it out later. They can retain anything they intercept even if domestic, for up to one year if it might contain evidence of domestic criminal activity.

 

[flacaltenn]

That POS Public Relations document was NEVER "a classified Intel Report". It was written for POLITICAL expediency.

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

Just because someone cuts the check doesn't mean that the integrity of the third party is invalid. Crowdstrike has a stellar performance history.

How OLD was this "stellar performance"? And who;'s money set that company up in business? The same one that visited the WH over 350 times during the BHO admin????

You cut the check == YOU control what people get to know. How many OTHER "hacks" occurred on those machines? Don't tell me that's the ONLY traces they found.

It's had a stellar report card ever since it has been in business. And even before that, the guy had a company with another guy, and he had a stellar record there before they parted ways.

It's not always that who cuts the check has influence. For example when I did my internship with the PI. He said that when people and companies pay him to do a job, he reports back what he finds, even if it isn't what the company wants to hear. For example an motor accident... interviewing an eye witness and them saying something the corroborates the story of the other party... he doesn't leave that out, he tells them.

I asked you HOW LONG... It was only FORMED in 2012. Didn't get big attention til 2014. What kind of "Stellar history" is that? You think in 2 or 3 years they amassed ANYWHERE NEAR the expertise and EQUIPMENT and Resources of the FBI Counter Cyber Group who DIDN'T GET to analyze the evidence? or NSA ???

 

[Lewdog]

Why lie bro?

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.


The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future. 

Thus, while the conclusions in the report are all reflected in the classified assessment, the declassified report does not and cannot include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence and sources and methods.

It HAD no basis for an Intel Assessment.. NOT ONE agency had access to the primary evidence.
They relied on a 3rd party PAID FOR by the DNC. Which CONTROLLED everything KNOWN about the private company assessment..

Just because someone cuts the check doesn't mean that the integrity of the third party is invalid. Crowdstrike has a stellar performance history.

How OLD was this "stellar performance"? And who;'s money set that company up in business? The same one that visited the WH over 350 times during the BHO admin????

You cut the check == YOU control what people get to know. How many OTHER "hacks" occurred on those machines? Don't tell me that's the ONLY traces they found.

It's had a stellar report card ever since it has been in business. And even before that, the guy had a company with another guy, and he had a stellar record there before they parted ways.

It's not always that who cuts the check has influence. For example when I did my internship with the PI. He said that when people and companies pay him to do a job, he reports back what he finds, even if it isn't what the company wants to hear. For example an motor accident... interviewing an eye witness and them saying something the corroborates the story of the other party... he doesn't leave that out, he tells them.

I asked you HOW LONG... It was only FORMED in 2012. Didn't get big attention til 2014. What kind of "Stellar history" is that? You think in 2 or 3 years they amassed ANYWHERE NEAR the expertise and EQUIPMENT and Resources of the FBI Counter Cyber Group who DIDN'T GET to analyze the evidence? or NSA ???

You're only looking at the company history. You have to look at the man behind the company and his employees. If Mark Cuban started a business tomorrow are you going to judge the expertise of the company on the length of its inception or are you going to judge it based on Mark Cuban's track record?

George Kurtz is the co-founder... check out his bio.

George Kurtz - President, CEO and Co-founder of Crowdstrike

 

[Ame®icano]

Sounds to me like the DNC didn't WANT Intel agencies pawing over their compromised servers. Needed a "friendly" investigator to spin a yarn... Someone ring up Clapper.. Ask him how long they EXAMINED the primary evidence.

Instead, the FBI outsourced the computer forensics analysis to IT security company CrowdStrike which first pointed the finger at Moscow in May.

“CrowdStrike is pretty good. There’s no reason to believe that anything that they have concluded is not accurate,” one intelligence official told BuzzFeed, insisting that the company was “confident” Russia was behind the hacks.

“Beginning at the time the intrusion was discovered by the DNC, the DNC cooperated fully with the FBI and its investigation, providing access to all of the information uncovered by CrowdStrike — without any limits,” Walker added.

‘What is going on?’ Trump wonders why FBI never requested access to the DNC’s ‘hacked servers’

There is a lot in the report we are not privy to.

FBI/Intelligence outsources a lot because, quite frankly, private companies have far better and more up to date tools and technology. All federal agencies do now. Not sure why it should suddenly be an issue. Didn't Crowdstrike also work with the Sony servers when they got hacked by NK? Why didn't anyone demand more evidence? Why didn't anyone question why the FBI didn't examine Sony directly?

ANYTIME the source is suspected to be foreign intelligence services, it should be handled by the MASSIVE, and EXISTING dozen agencies for Counter Cyber. We're adding NEW groups every year. More and more people and labs and capabilities. And PRIVATE contractors should ONLY be used if they have the clearances and access to handle espionage level intrusions. Sorry Sony -- but we need access to your server. We'll send you a cleaned copy. You have no choice. It's now a matter of National Security.

I'm fuming because I've waiting to see what the government reaction was to all these clues that were known PUBLICLY for months, maybe a year. And NO ONE can tell how all these multi-$BILL agencies were mobilized and USED to obtain and REAL evidence. It appears that everything known about the DNC hack came from a Google funded group. So FIRE all these resources you think are totally inferior and unable and unaware.

I agree with you, and your questions.

First-off, Sony was NOT a matter of national security, so CrowdStrike is welcome to investigate. I have no issues with them doing that.

However, the hack of the DNC has national repercussions. In my opinion, it was not wise to have them investigate what happened at the DNC. A left leaning organization, owned by leftist billionaires, investigating for a losing Democrat candidate, by a Liberal administration, on servers not taken into evidence, leads the results to be questioned for accuracy. All in all, what could go sideways with all of that?

I also concur with your position that since the government doesn't have enough faith in their own cyber security experts to do a top notch job, they need to shit can the entire lot and go strictly with private companies.

When the DNI says "We assess...", assessments can be wrong. (Example: I assess rightwinger is a nutjob, BUT I COULD BE WRONG.) When he didn't say "We know..." or "We can prove...", it leaves the results wide open for debate.

At this moment, the whole thing isn't passing the smell test.

You are TOTALLY deranged!

Don't investigate because the foreign attack was on a "left leaning organization"????

Are you F'ing SERIOUS???

Beyond that, the attack was NOT limited to that. The Russians set up a fake news assault to dis-inform the American public and to thus attempt to defeat our democracy.

The issue isn't whether it affected the election.

The issue is that Russia ATTACKED US!

And, ignoring that is unbelievable anti-Americanism.

It's exactly what Putin wants - and YOU back that!?!?!

 

[Ame®icano]

DNC is not any different than Sony etc - it's not a federal or governmental entity. I'm not sure how much power we want to give the FBI in being able to force political parties to comply ESPECIALLY in the midst of a really contentious election. I think using Crowdstrike is perfectly acceptable. We outsource national security issues, we outsource intelligence - I'm not seeing this as a huge issue.

When DNC claimed that Russians hacked the US elections and as a proof used alleged hacking the DNC server they make it government business.

Using Crowdstike would be acceptable if FBI did not requested the access to their server. Since they rejected, they cannot claim that "hacking" is somehow government business.

It's like bank claiming a robbery and not letting cops to investigate.

 

[Ame®icano]

Doesn't work like a jury. NONE of them had access to the CENTRAL EVIDENCE of a hacking. If you didn't DO the work -- you don't get to "vote"....

They had access to the classified version of the report. And they agreed with its unclassified conclusions. All 17 agencies.

Whose report was that?

By the way, why do we have 17 intelligence agencies if we could simply use the contractors?

 

[Ame®icano]

You said it every time you asked for evidence.

Huh? I said evidence would be leaked. Jesus Christ.

And every time that anonymous leaked evidence is posted, you cry it's not evidence.

 

[Ame®icano]

I'm amazed at the number of people that still think the government intelligence agencies are just going to give out the way they were able to trace the hackers...

Every time I see someone say that it's obvious they have no idea how intelligence gathering works.

You seems to be amazed by many things.

Every time you claim you know something it turns out that you speaking out of your ass.

Every time? Please make a list and show me. Most times when I say I know something I provide proof of it.

Yes, every time.

Has that professor you said you contacted about hacking the voting machines ever answered to you?

 

[Lewdog]

I'm amazed at the number of people that still think the government intelligence agencies are just going to give out the way they were able to trace the hackers...

Every time I see someone say that it's obvious they have no idea how intelligence gathering works.

You seems to be amazed by many things.

Every time you claim you know something it turns out that you speaking out of your ass.

Every time? Please make a list and show me. Most times when I say I know something I provide proof of it.

Has that professor you said you contacted about hacking the voting machines ever answered to you?

Nope he never did... I didn't expect him to given how busy he probably is, but I gave it a shot.

 

[Ame®icano]

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.

I can't size you up because you limit who can see your history. Hiding something?

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." -- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

I ask again. Is this you:Why are you Russian?

Can I call them fascists when they act fascistly?

I don't think you'll ever call Democrats fascist even when they act so.