I think this judge is going to

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

You just can’t admit you are wrong here, can you?

The FBI pays informants, although in this case the money was offered but not paid This is a standard practice governed by a defined set of rules. It is legal and accepted practice and happens often and in all kinds of different scenarios. If the FBI had operated outside of those rules, it would be illegal and Durham would have indicted and prosecuted those responsible. He did not even suggest that bribery occurred here, much less bring charges.

You are trying to support a point by accusing the FBI of bribery and you are wrong.

I’m still waiting for the proof that the FBI admitted corruption.


The FBI absolutely made mistakes. These mistakes were documented and addressed in the internal 2019 report and changes were made. At this point, no one is suggesting otherwise. Despite running another three years, Durham didn’t suggest a single additional change beyond what had already been implemented.

Durham also didn’t find illegal or partisan intent behind the mistakes made by the FBI, which always seems to be ignored when the topic is discussed.

There were LE and DOJ officials that signed multiple warrant applications they literally KNEW to be unverified at best and most likely knew were false in order to spy on a POTUS campaign as well as a sitting POTUS. There is now evidence that Brennan briefed Biden and O about the scheme they knew was created by the Clinton campaign and they didn't shut it down. This makes the Watergate break in look like a parking ticket and is as undemocratic as it gets.

 

[poorpreacher]

And.....back to the motion to dismiss Ms. Willis.

There seems to be some confusion about the burden of proof, to grant the motion.

Some seem to suggest that the defense has to prove Willis lied, or has a conflict, beyond reasonable doubt.

Based on my understanding this is NOT the standard. Willis is not on trial for a crime. Her ethics are the issue and her ability to do her job fairly.

Any reasonable person can see her conduct has been very questionable.

I don't understand the "I paid cash, but don't have any receipts" defense. She knows better. If she paid cash, she KNEW she would need receipts, to avoid the very issues that have arisen.

 

[zingerdawg]

Try using your two eyes to read the report you keep touting and you might know what it actually says.

I’m curious what those same two eyes tell you about the guy you would have move back into the White House, given your deep concern about corruption. You know, the one who asked for and received help from Putin, who tried to strong arm Ukraine into providing dirt on Biden (an action that looks even worse given recent developments) and of course attempted to steal the presidency.

Voting for him again must present a true moral dilemma for you. Or not.

My two eyes have two choices. Only someone naive believes Biden isn’t just as corrupt or evil. He is an 50 year politician. Just the same, Biden asked the doj to go after his political opponent. He also used the cia for his bidding and protection. Biden has done just as bad or worse. I am sure of that. His policy just killed an innocent girl. He planned such a poor pull out of Afghanistan he had a ton of people killed there as well. How many is too many will.

And only a person with an agenda doesn’t see he is no longer mentally fit to be president.

 

[willdup]

There were LE and DOJ officials that signed multiple warrant applications they literally KNEW to be unverified at best and most likely knew were false in order to spy on a POTUS campaign as well as a sitting POTUS. There is now evidence that Brennan briefed Biden and O about the scheme they knew was created by the Clinton campaign and they didn't shut it down. This makes the Watergate break in look like a parking ticket and is as undemocratic as it gets.

You act as if the Trump campaign didn’t have concerning engagement with the Russians, which simply isn’t true. The Steele Dossier was used incorrectly for Carter Paige’s FISA warrant, but what about everything else? And this list doesn’t even include Trump’s public request for illegal assistance from Russia by hacking Dem emails.

Was the FBI simply supposed to give the campaign a pass? Hell no.

FACTS about the Trump Campaign's Russian ties.

- High-Level Contacts: Members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, had multiple contacts with Russian nationals and officials. These included meetings to obtain damaging information on Hillary Clinton and discussions about U.S.-Russia relations.

- Trump Tower Meeting: In June 2016, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and others at Trump Tower, believing they would receive damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

- George Papadopoulos: He had contacts with Russian nationals who claimed to have "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. This information was relayed to the Australian High Commissioner and subsequently to the FBI, triggering the initial investigation.

- Paul Manafort: Trump's former campaign chairman shared internal campaign polling data with Konstantin Kilimnik, a figure with ties to Russian intelligence.

- Michael Flynn: Trump's former National Security Advisor had conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about lifting sanctions, which he initially lied about to the FBI.

- Roger Stone: He had foreknowledge about WikiLeaks releases of materials damaging to the Clinton campaign and was in contact with individuals linked to the Russian government or possessing knowledge of the hacks.

 

[atlanta cock#]

You act as if the Trump campaign didn’t have concerning engagement with the Russians, which simply isn’t true. The Steele Dossier was used incorrectly for Carter Paige’s FISA warrant, but what about everything else? And this list doesn’t even include Trump’s public request for illegal assistance from Russia by hacking Dem emails.

Was the FBI simply supposed to give the campaign a pass? Hell no.

FACTS about the Trump Campaign's Russian ties.

- High-Level Contacts: Members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, had multiple contacts with Russian nationals and officials. These included meetings to obtain damaging information on Hillary Clinton and discussions about U.S.-Russia relations.

- Trump Tower Meeting: In June 2016, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and others at Trump Tower, believing they would receive damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

- George Papadopoulos: He had contacts with Russian nationals who claimed to have "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. This information was relayed to the Australian High Commissioner and subsequently to the FBI, triggering the initial investigation.

- Paul Manafort: Trump's former campaign chairman shared internal campaign polling data with Konstantin Kilimnik, a figure with ties to Russian intelligence.

- Michael Flynn: Trump's former National Security Advisor had conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about lifting sanctions, which he initially lied about to the FBI.

- Roger Stone: He had foreknowledge about WikiLeaks releases of materials damaging to the Clinton campaign and was in contact with individuals linked to the Russian government or possessing knowledge of the hacks.

I'm not sure I'm following your point. Everyone gathers dirt on opponents. Black Jesus and Bubba did. To be sure, Hillary did which resulted in the fake Steele Dossier which arguably caused more damage and division to this country than anything in recent history except maybe Covid. Yet nobody was charged because they're on the "right" team. Same with Fauci, Birx and NIH. None of them were held accountable either despite enriching themselves in China with bald faced lies.

 

[zingerdawg]

I'm not sure I'm following your point. Everyone gathers dirt on opponents. Black Jesus and Bubba did. To be sure, Hillary did which resulted in the fake Steele Dossier which arguably caused more damage and division to this country than anything in recent history except maybe Covid. Yet nobody was charged because they're on the "right" team. Same with Fauci, Birx and NIH. None of them were held accountable either despite enriching themselves in China with bald faced lies.

Exactly. These dastardly meetings. The one that set off the 40 million dollar tax payer flush for no reason, turned out to be about their favorite soccer formations. He keeps going there like it is amazing campaigns would do such a thing. I mean look at this time around. The lefties have the Orangeman in every courtroom they can put him in. Removing him from ballots. Playing as dirty as you can play. Biden’s campaign manager in 2020 got 51 cia agents to lie for him.

It is all about what side you play for.

 

[willdup]

I'm not sure I'm following your point. Everyone gathers dirt on opponents. Black Jesus and Bubba did. To be sure, Hillary did which resulted in the fake Steele Dossier which arguably caused more damage and division to this country than anything in recent history except maybe Covid. Yet nobody was charged because they're on the "right" team. Same with Fauci, Birx and NIH. None of them were held accountable either despite enriching themselves in China with bald faced lies.

Show me another example where a national candidate, or even a Senate or House candidate, knowingly engaged with a belligerent nation in their effort to win an election, much less publicly requested it. Or show me another candidate whose campaign head was deemed an extreme counterintelligence threat.

I bet you can't.

And what exactly do you think Putin was expecting in return for his significant investment? If you say nothing, you are being willfully ignorant.

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

You act as if the Trump campaign didn’t have concerning engagement with the Russians, which simply isn’t true. The Steele Dossier was used incorrectly for Carter Paige’s FISA warrant, but what about everything else? And this list doesn’t even include Trump’s public request for illegal assistance from Russia by hacking Dem emails.

Was the FBI simply supposed to give the campaign a pass? Hell no.

FACTS about the Trump Campaign's Russian ties.

- High-Level Contacts: Members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, had multiple

You act as if the Trump campaign didn’t have concerning engagement with the Russians, which simply isn’t true. The Steele Dossier was used incorrectly for Carter Paige’s FISA warrant, but what about everything else? And this list doesn’t even include Trump’s public request for illegal assistance from Russia by hacking Dem emails.

Was the FBI simply supposed to give the campaign a pass? Hell no.

FACTS about the Trump Campaign's Russian ties.

- High-Level Contacts: Members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, had multiple contacts with Russian nationals and officials. These included meetings to obtain damaging information on Hillary Clinton and discussions about U.S.-Russia relations.

- Trump Tower Meeting: In June 2016, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and others at Trump Tower, believing they would receive damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

- George Papadopoulos: He had contacts with Russian nationals who claimed to have "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. This information was relayed to the Australian High Commissioner and subsequently to the FBI, triggering the initial investigation.

- Paul Manafort: Trump's former campaign chairman shared internal campaign polling data with Konstantin Kilimnik, a figure with ties to Russian intelligence.

- Michael Flynn: Trump's former National Security Advisor had conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about lifting sanctions, which he initially lied about to the FBI.

- Roger Stone: He had foreknowledge about WikiLeaks releases of materials damaging to the Clinton campaign and was in contact with individuals linked to the Russian government or possessing knowledge of the hacks.

You act as if lying to a secret court in order to obtain at least 2 illegal warrants to spy on a POTUS candidate and ultimately the POTUS while using known inaccurate evidence presented by a foreign national isn't a scandal of huge proportion.

 

[Don Ellis]

You act as if lying to a secret court in order to obtain at least 2 illegal warrants to spy on a POTUS candidate and ultimately the POTUS while using known inaccurate evidence presented by a foreign national isn't a scandal of huge proportion.

Man they don’t care about that hahaha

Like literally a DNC funded investigation of non-corroborating evidence circumvented the laws and courts of this country.

 

[willdup]

You act as if lying to a secret court in order to obtain at least 2 illegal warrants to spy on a POTUS candidate and ultimately the POTUS while using known inaccurate evidence presented by a foreign national isn't a scandal of huge proportion.

Man they don’t care about that hahaha

Like literally a DNC funded investigation of non-corroborating evidence circumvented the laws and courts of this country.

Yet you are entirely unbothered by the fact that Trump and five of his senior advisors and his son were all playing footsie with Putin and the Russians, which preceded the initial investigations.

Of course, you can point to the fact that Trump was not found to have illegally colluded, the FBI and DOJ were also found to have not broken the law. So if you want to be outraged, you should at least include Trump’s open request for illegal Russian help and all the other contacts to the list along with the two incorrect FISA warrants.

 

[Athens is Heaven]

Yet you are entirely unbothered by the fact that Trump and five of his senior advisors and his son were all playing footsie with Putin and the Russians, which preceded the initial investigations.

Of course, you can point to the fact that Trump was not found to have illegally colluded, the FBI and DOJ were also found to have not broken the law. So if you want to be outraged, you should at least include Trump’s open request for illegal Russian help and all the other contacts to the list along with the two incorrect FISA warrants.

All a big lie. Obama tried his hardest to get Trump.

 

[Don Ellis]

Yet you are entirely unbothered by the fact that Trump and five of his senior advisors and his son were all playing footsie with Putin and the Russians, which preceded the initial investigations.

Of course, you can point to the fact that Trump was not found to have illegally colluded, the FBI and DOJ were also found to have not broken the law. So if you want to be outraged, you should at least include Trump’s open request for illegal Russian help and all the other contacts to the list along with the two incorrect FISA warrants.

One thing at a time my friend

I think you have found I have 0 reason to not call out Trump for stuff but I can actually point to the fact he did not collude…no need for you to add in the “illegally” hahaha colluding is colluding

Just accept the fact the DNC funded Steele Dossier did in fact circumvent this nations laws and courts to obtain warrants and call it a day. It is what it is

 

[Athens is Heaven]

Show me another example where a national candidate, or even a Senate or House candidate, knowingly engaged with a belligerent nation in their effort to win an election, much less publicly requested it. Or show me another candidate whose campaign head was deemed an extreme counterintelligence threat.

I bet you can't.

And what exactly do you think Putin was expecting in return for his significant investment? If you say nothing, you are being willfully ignorant.

He was expecting something from Hillary because she was the one that used the Steele dossier to try and get Trump disqualified.

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

Yet you are entirely unbothered by the fact that Trump and five of his senior advisors and his son were all playing footsie with Putin and the Russians, which preceded the initial investigations.

Of course, you can point to the fact that Trump was not found to have illegally colluded, the FBI and DOJ were also found to have not broken the law. So if you want to be outraged, you should at least include Trump’s open request for illegal Russian help and all the other contacts to the list along with the two incorrect FISA warrants.

Nope. There was NEVER any evidence that Trump was colluding with Russia outside of any contacts that aren't unusual between party nominees and foreign governments and any non partisan response by LE would have quickly dismissed the dossier as being a piece of opposition research garbage paid for by the Clinton team.

As far as the FBI not committing crimes. If knowingly swearing to the accuracy of evidence you are using to obtain a warrant isn't criminal, our democracy is already lost. Democracy depends of the rule of law if anything else. When those enforcing the rule of law aren't bound by the rule of law, you have an autocracy and that is how the intel community and doj have acted.

 

[willdup]

Nope. There was NEVER any evidence that Trump was colluding with Russia outside of any contacts that aren't unusual between party nominees and foreign governments and any non partisan response by LE would have quickly dismissed the dossier as being a piece of opposition research garbage paid for by the Clinton team.

As far as the FBI not committing crimes. If knowingly swearing to the accuracy of evidence you are using to obtain a warrant isn't criminal, our democracy is already lost. Democracy depends of the rule of law if anything else. When those enforcing the rule of law aren't bound by the rule of law, you have an autocracy and that is how the intel community and doj have acted.

No evidence? They shared internal polling data, they took meetings, and they asked for, encouraged and welcomed Russian assistance. This is all well established fact.

Quite a funny coincidence that the Russians starting hacking Hillary’s computers right after this press conference. Also wildly lucky for Trump that they decided to drop the first tranche of emails the same day as the pu**sygrab tape.

Next you’ll try to tell me J6 was a tourist visit.



https://apnews.com/united-states-government-354131a3ff5048988ad0a320d090203f

 

[maugwa]

After todays announcements that two other witnesses have come forward with information to impeach Willis, Wade and Bradley this judge has to be PISSED. Delta flight records have been obtained as well. These 3 have made a fraud on the court and tried to scam the system. All 3 will lose their bar licenses now. There is no covering this shit up.

Trump will sue Fulton County for $1 billion dollars for this fiasco.

GLORIOUS

 

[atlanta cock#]

No evidence? They shared internal polling data, they took meetings, and they asked for, encouraged and welcomed Russian assistance. This is all well established fact.

Quite a funny coincidence that the Russians starting hacking Hillary’s computers right after this press conference. Also wildly lucky for Trump that they decided to drop the first tranche of emails the same day as the pu**sygrab tape.

Next you’ll try to tell me J6 was a tourist visit.

View embedded media

https://apnews.com/united-states-government-354131a3ff5048988ad0a320d090203f

I don't trust the AP.

But given how the Steele Dossier came about, can't you acknowledge that the Ds use every source they can, including those overseas, to dig up dirt? In Hillary's case, she was so desperate she bought a story of total BS. But, because the media is so biased, they never vetted it but instead ran with it, forever tarnishing their credibility.

 

[willdup]

I don't trust the AP.

But given how the Steele Dossier came about, can't you acknowledge that the Ds use every source they can, including those overseas, to dig up dirt? In Hillary's case, she was so desperate she bought a story of total BS. But, because the media is so biased, they never vetted it but instead ran with it, forever tarnishing their credibility.

Nice sidestep of the video of Trump publicly and directly requesting illegal help from Russia, that he received. That has nothing to do with the AP.

Did you know that Steele, a former British intelligence officer, was initially hired by the conservative Washington Free Beacon to do the oppo work on Trump? He was hired because he is a known expert on Russia, and Trump surrounded himself with people with ties to Russia (along with the public request referenced above).

Ultimately, yes it was picked up by Fusion GPS and funded by Hillary’s campaign, but none of that was as “unusual” as asking for and getting help from a foreign adversary.

And finally, the Durham report found that mistakes were made by the FBI. He found zero evidence of political bias or a plot to “get” Trump, despite ongoing efforts to spin it that way.

 

[Moosefish]

Nice sidestep of the video of Trump publicly and directly requesting illegal help from Russia, that he received.

I had a much longer response to this subject previously in other threads that I didn't post, that I had decided to never post for reasons that are irrelevant....but, whatever. Bottom line, your framing of this is flawed:

1. No Russian hacking has ever been confirmed by any gov't agency, based on primary evidence. The DNC hack "evidence" was never turned over to the FBI, despite being requested multiple times. The firm in charge of that security had $$$ reasons to come to conclusions that fell in line w/ the people paying their bills. They were also WRONG about Russian connections in previous instances and inappropriately connected Russian hacking to a Ukrainian issue. But sure, let's believe them on this issue, despite their repeated "mistakes" (that also made critical North Korean mistakes).

2. The DNC hack & Podesta phishing happened months before Trump's comments & the release happened right before Trump asked for "help".

3. No proven Russian "hacking" ever happened after Trump's supposed clandestine (public) cry for "help". Given all the supposed "Russian connections", one would assume he wouldn't have to make a public request, if he actually had a backdoor connection. It's such a stupid presumption that I can't believe it's still a foundational 'claim'. The bigger story at the time of the "leak" was about things that helped Bernie & his claim of DNC favoritism....then Trump was asked about it & he made a public request to get the rest of the "Hillary emails". How many more Clinton "hacks" or Hillary emails were ever recovered or hacked? Would "none" be the right answer?

4. The next "evidence" is the release around the "Grab them..." leak release...as some sort of cover for Trump. You know what's forgotten? The Wiki/Guccifer leaks were announced ahead of time. EVERYONE knew something was about to come out. One could argue that the leaked Trump tapes were an attempt to cover for whatever the 'hack' was about to release.

The entire premise that Trump speaking off the cuff...in an attempt to make the thousands of deleted Hillary emails an issue...was somehow a "RUSSIAN COLLUSION!" action (despite his repeated distancing from Putin), "illegal" hack request is beyond silly. How about the Fusion GPS 'contractors', with Kremlin connections, requesting a meeting w/ Don Jr.? The only campaign w/ proven funding of Russian connections was Hillary's. Yet, someone that one "request" from Trump...in public...to reporters...is somehow "proof" of inappropriate connections. YGTBFKM.

/rant

 

[willdup]

I had a much longer response to this subject previously in other threads that I didn't post, that I had decided to never post for reasons that are irrelevant....but, whatever. Bottom line, your framing of this is flawed:

1. No Russian hacking has ever been confirmed by any gov't agency, based on primary evidence. The DNC hack "evidence" was never turned over to the FBI, despite being requested multiple times. The firm in charge of that security had $$$ reasons to come to conclusions that fell in line w/ the people paying their bills. They were also WRONG about Russian connections in previous instances and inappropriately connected Russian hacking to a Ukrainian issue. But sure, let's believe them on this issue, despite their repeated "mistakes" (that also made critical North Korean mistakes).

2. The DNC hack & Podesta phishing happened months before Trump's comments & the release happened right before Trump asked for "help".

3. No proven Russian "hacking" ever happened after Trump's supposed clandestine (public) cry for "help". Given all the supposed "Russian connections", one would assume he wouldn't have to make a public request, if he actually had a backdoor connection. It's such a stupid presumption that I can't believe it's still a foundational 'claim'. The bigger story at the time of the "leak" was about things that helped Bernie & his claim of DNC favoritism....then Trump was asked about it & he made a public request to get the rest of the "Hillary emails". How many more Clinton "hacks" or Hillary emails were ever recovered or hacked? Would "none" be the right answer?

4. The next "evidence" is the release around the "Grab them..." leak release...as some sort of cover for Trump. You know what's forgotten? The Wiki/Guccifer leaks were announced ahead of time. EVERYONE knew something was about to come out. One could argue that the leaked Trump tapes were an attempt to cover for whatever the 'hack' was about to release.

The entire premise that Trump speaking off the cuff...in an attempt to make the thousands of deleted Hillary emails an issue...was somehow a "RUSSIAN COLLUSION!" action (despite his repeated distancing from Putin), "illegal" hack request is beyond silly. How about the Fusion GPS 'contractors', with Kremlin connections, requesting a meeting w/ Don Jr.? The only campaign w/ proven funding of Russian connections was Hillary's. Yet, someone that one "request" from Trump...in public...to reporters...is somehow "proof" of inappropriate connections. YGTBFKM.

/rant

The assessment that Russia engaged in hacking activities during the 2016 United States presidential election is supported by findings from multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, cybersecurity firms, and Congressional investigations. Here are key pieces of evidence and findings that have been publicly disclosed:

1. **Joint Analysis Report (JAR):** Released in December 2016 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the report provided technical details about the methods used by Russian intelligence operatives, known by their aliases APT28 (Fancy Bear) and APT29 (Cozy Bear), to infiltrate and extract information from political, military, and governmental targets in the United States and elsewhere.

2. **Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA):** In January 2017, a declassified report was published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), representing the collective analysis of the CIA, FBI, and NSA. The report concluded with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election. The goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Hillary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. It further stated that Russia used hacking and leaks to disseminate information obtained during cyber operations to influence the election.

3. **Indictments by the Special Counsel Investigation:** The investigation led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller resulted in the indictment of 12 Russian GRU officers in July 2018. The indictment detailed the operations of hacking into the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and the Clinton campaign's emails, and then releasing that information via online platforms, such as DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0, and WikiLeaks, to influence the election.

4. **Cybersecurity Firm Analysis:** Independent cybersecurity firms, including CrowdStrike, which was hired by the DNC to investigate the breach of their network, confirmed the involvement of APT28 and APT29 in the cyberattacks. These firms published detailed technical evidence linking the hacking activities to these Russian groups, known to be associated with Russia's military intelligence service, the GRU.

5. **Testimony and Reports from U.S. Congressional Committees:** Various U.S. Congressional committees conducted their investigations and hearings into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Their reports and findings corroborated the intelligence community's assessment regarding Russian hacking activities.

These pieces of evidence, collectively, form the basis of the conclusion that Russia engaged in hacking and influence operations to affect the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

You are correct that the primary hack attempt of the DNC emails started in March while Trump’s request came in July. But suggesting that his comment was off the cuff when the topic of Russian interference was already being discussed is disingenuous, particularly given all of the other contacts and the Trump tower meeting.

 

[Moosefish]

The assessment that Russia engaged in hacking activities during the 2016 United States presidential election is supported by findings from multiple U.S. intelligence agencies, cybersecurity firms, and Congressional investigations. Here are key pieces of evidence and findings that have been publicly disclosed:

1. **Joint Analysis Report (JAR):** Released in December 2016 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the report provided technical details about the methods used by Russian intelligence operatives, known by their aliases APT28 (Fancy Bear) and APT29 (Cozy Bear), to infiltrate and extract information from political, military, and governmental targets in the United States and elsewhere.

2. **Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA):** In January 2017, a declassified report was published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), representing the collective analysis of the CIA, FBI, and NSA. The report concluded with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election. The goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Hillary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. It further stated that Russia used hacking and leaks to disseminate information obtained during cyber operations to influence the election.

3. **Indictments by the Special Counsel Investigation:** The investigation led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller resulted in the indictment of 12 Russian GRU officers in July 2018. The indictment detailed the operations of hacking into the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and the Clinton campaign's emails, and then releasing that information via online platforms, such as DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0, and WikiLeaks, to influence the election.

4. **Cybersecurity Firm Analysis:** Independent cybersecurity firms, including CrowdStrike, which was hired by the DNC to investigate the breach of their network, confirmed the involvement of APT28 and APT29 in the cyberattacks. These firms published detailed technical evidence linking the hacking activities to these Russian groups, known to be associated with Russia's military intelligence service, the GRU.

5. **Testimony and Reports from U.S. Congressional Committees:** Various U.S. Congressional committees conducted their investigations and hearings into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Their reports and findings corroborated the intelligence community's assessment regarding Russian hacking activities.

These pieces of evidence, collectively, form the basis of the conclusion that Russia engaged in hacking and influence operations to affect the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

1. You're arguing things that aren't relevant to my post & also completely ignoring the points I made...in an apparent hope that mass overwhelms precision.

2. NOBODY had the original "evidence" of the DNC "hack". The FBI requested it...but never got it. Comey changed his tune after demanding it.

Please provide any evidence that a government agency was able to investigate anything that wasn't second hand or "trusted" CrowdStrike's determination.

You can't because they refused to provide it.

 

[willdup]

1. You're arguing things that aren't relevant to my post & also completely ignoring the points I made...in an apparent hope that mass overwhelms precision.

2. NOBODY had the original "evidence" of the DNC "hack". The FBI requested it...but never got it. Comey changed his tune after demanding it.

Please provide any evidence that a government agency was able to investigate anything that wasn't second hand or "trusted" CrowdStrike's determination.

You can't because they refused to provide it.

So everybody is wrong and Russia didn’t undertake the hacking operation that is acknowledged as having occurred? Are you saying someone else did it? Help me understand your point.

Do you have no issue with a presidential candidate openly asking for assistance from Russia, or that they provided that assistance (according to nearly everyone but you, I guess).

How about the fact that Trump sided with Putin instead of our intelligence services in Helsinki?

 

[Moosefish]

So everybody is wrong and Russia didn’t undertake the hacking operation that is acknowledged as having occurred? Are you saying someone else did it? Help me understand your point.

Do you have no issue with a presidential candidate openly asking for assistance from Russia, or that they provided that assistance (according to nearly everyone but you, I guess).

How about the fact that Trump sided with Putin instead of our intelligence services in Helsinki?

1. I was very specific in the instances I discussed

2. I have some professional knowledge of the issues at hand

3. Much of the "analysis" is based on "hacking programs" that Russian orgs have used...but, are also freely available to literally every other 'bad actor' and their use does not automatically equal "Russia!". "Compelling, but not convincing"

4. This includes "phishing" attempts that are absolutely not Russia-only, but many/most 'bad actors' also use...yet the 'analysis' decided to pinpoint towards Russia w/ no actual evidence besides "Russia does this, too".
"Compelling, but not convincing"

5. This doesn't mean that Russia didn't "do stuff"...but, it also is not absolute proof that Russia acted in response to Trump's stupid comment. Again, there is FAR MORE proof that Hillary's campaign had $$ & cooperation w/ actual Russian government assets. That's a fact.

4. I'm not going to participate in your regular attempt to go on tangents when your points are challenged

5. So, again: Russia supposedly did all their hacking before Trump's comments. The only "proof" that it was Russia was from CrowdStrike, who never shared their raw data w/ anybody & who also had financial reasons to make it "Russia" (just like they did when they made multiple, verified "mistakes" previously when blaming nations that were not in fact, "guilty")

6. I bring up the "grab them by the..." comment, because you have used it as "proof" that a leak was used to somehow cover for Trump w/ the release of that info (even though it's laughable to say that those comments weren't covered due to anything...it was a huge, widely-covered story). Again, the 'leak release' was publicly announced beforehand. It's not a huge logical jump to say that release of Trump's comments weren't made to "cover" for the potential leak release.

7. There is overwhelming evidence that the Obama adminsitration-led CIA participated in illegal actions to target the Trump campaign, based all of their investigations off of circular-logic, self-serving "evidence" that forced entrapment of multiple Trump-related actors. The only "connection" that existed prior to US-gov't sponsored actions was Manafort's...and he was fired for them.

Are we not allowed to discuss all the "Russian-related" or even any other "foreign-related" connections to any other campaign? Hell, without going on another tangent, we have proof of large amounts of $ being paid to Hunter Biden from foreign governments or their close-related agents. Is that not more troubling than Don Jr. being set up by a Russian-related Fusion GPS contractor? Come on, man.


Again...please provide verified Russian assistance that's not based on CrowdStrike's analysis. Beyond that...the overwhelming analysis of Russia's intentions in 2016 (that's not politically-colored) is that they wanted CHAOS, which is exactly what they got. If you step back and realize that Putin is not a moron...he's playing us. He does whatever stirs us up the most...just like he made sure it appeared he was "promoting Trump" in 2020, he's now "promoting" Biden, now. Why? Because he wants that chaos and doubt in our system.

 

[Moosefish]

...or that they provided that assistance (according to nearly everyone but you, I guess).

...And again, what "assistance"? Please name one verified Russian hack that occurred after April '16 & before the '16 election.

 

[Moosefish]

So everybody is wrong and Russia didn’t undertake the hacking operation that is acknowledged as having occurred? Are you saying someone else did it? Help me understand your point.

Do you have no issue with a presidential candidate openly asking for assistance from Russia, or that they provided that assistance (according to nearly everyone but you, I guess).

How about the fact that Trump sided with Putin instead of our intelligence services in Helsinki?

One other factoid for you: prior to March '16, the FBI warned the DNC & the RNC they were active targets for intrusion attempts.

The RNC took action, the DNC ignored it. But sure, it was a Russian conspiracy spurred on by Trump, defying the space/time continum, prior to him being the presumptive nominee.

 

[poorpreacher]

After todays announcements that two other witnesses have come forward with information to impeach Willis, Wade and Bradley this judge has to be PISSED. Delta flight records have been obtained as well. These 3 have made a fraud on the court and tried to scam the system. All 3 will lose their bar licenses now. There is no covering this shit up.

Trump will sue Fulton County for $1 billion dollars for this fiasco.

GLORIOUS

I saw the information about the 2 other witnesses, but not the flight records. There is 0 doubt that Wade, Willis, and Bradley committed perjury. They should be removed and disbarred. Will the judge have the stones to do what's rugjt and disqualify the whole office?

 

[MidwestDawgKC]

No evidence? They shared internal polling data, they took meetings, and they asked for, encouraged and welcomed Russian assistance. This is all well established fact.

Quite a funny coincidence that the Russians starting hacking Hillary’s computers right after this press conference. Also wildly lucky for Trump that they decided to drop the first tranche of emails the same day as the pu**sygrab tape.

Next you’ll try to tell me J6 was a tourist visit.

View embedded media

https://apnews.com/united-states-government-354131a3ff5048988ad0a320d090203f

J6 was orchestrated theater to create fear against future marches!

 

[willdup]

One other factoid for you: prior to March '16, the FBI warned the DNC & the RNC they were active targets for intrusion attempts.

The RNC took action, the DNC ignored it. But sure, it was a Russian conspiracy spurred on by Trump, defying the space/time continum, prior to him being the presumptive nominee.

I got the timing of the hacks wrong. Point conceded. Regardless, it seems you are suggesting there was no message in Trump’s comments directly asking Russia to hack the Dem emails and saying you will be rewarded (yes, by the press, but come on) if you find them. Simply off the cuff, I guess.

So everything documented in the Mueller Report and the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Report on Russian Interference is incorrect? The Muller indictments of GRU agents unwarranted? The social media efforts didn’t exist or were not designed to help Trump and harm Clinton?

Paul Manafort wasn’t deemed a severe counterintelligence threat due to his ties to Russia?

Ultimately, it seems you are claiming that Russia was not attempting to help Trump, despite that being the conclusion of every government agency that’s analyzed events.

Edit: Dem emails were released the same day the Washington Post broke the story of the P**sygrab tape, but it was the third tranche and not the first. That only mildly impacts my point regarding the timing of the release.

Publications | Intelligence Committee

www.intelligence.senate.gov

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

I had a much longer response to this subject previously in other threads that I didn't post, that I had decided to never post for reasons that are irrelevant....but, whatever. Bottom line, your framing of this is flawed:

1. No Russian hacking has ever been confirmed by any gov't agency, based on primary evidence. The DNC hack "evidence" was never turned over to the FBI, despite being requested multiple times. The firm in charge of that security had $$$ reasons to come to conclusions that fell in line w/ the people paying their bills. They were also WRONG about Russian connections in previous instances and inappropriately connected Russian hacking to a Ukrainian issue. But sure, let's believe them on this issue, despite their repeated "mistakes" (that also made critical North Korean mistakes).

2. The DNC hack & Podesta phishing happened months before Trump's comments & the release happened right before Trump asked for "help".

3. No proven Russian "hacking" ever happened after Trump's supposed clandestine (public) cry for "help". Given all the supposed "Russian connections", one would assume he wouldn't have to make a public request, if he actually had a backdoor connection. It's such a stupid presumption that I can't believe it's still a foundational 'claim'. The bigger story at the time of the "leak" was about things that helped Bernie & his claim of DNC favoritism....then Trump was asked about it & he made a public request to get the rest of the "Hillary emails". How many more Clinton "hacks" or Hillary emails were ever recovered or hacked? Would "none" be the right answer?

4. The next "evidence" is the release around the "Grab them..." leak release...as some sort of cover for Trump. You know what's forgotten? The Wiki/Guccifer leaks were announced ahead of time. EVERYONE knew something was about to come out. One could argue that the leaked Trump tapes were an attempt to cover for whatever the 'hack' was about to release.

The entire premise that Trump speaking off the cuff...in an attempt to make the thousands of deleted Hillary emails an issue...was somehow a "RUSSIAN COLLUSION!" action (despite his repeated distancing from Putin), "illegal" hack request is beyond silly. How about the Fusion GPS 'contractors', with Kremlin connections, requesting a meeting w/ Don Jr.? The only campaign w/ proven funding of Russian connections was Hillary's. Yet, someone that one "request" from Trump...in public...to reporters...is somehow "proof" of inappropriate connections. YGTBFKM.

/rant

And Trump's line about maybe Russia can find the missing emails was also a shot at our intel communities that somehow couldn't recover any of Hillary's subpoenaed emails. At the time, there was a lot of unbelievable BS coming out of the Hillary campaign (like wiped them with a cloth) and the LE community expected us to believe they couldn't track down any of the destroyed evidence.

 

[willdup]

And Trump's line about maybe Russia can find the missing emails was also a shot at our intel communities that somehow couldn't recover any of Hillary's subpoenaed emails. At the time, there was a lot of unbelievable BS coming out of the Hillary campaign (like wiped them with a cloth) and the LE community expected us to believe they couldn't track down any of the destroyed evidence.

It was mighty sporting of Trump to let Russia and the world know that he approved of the hacking and that that they “would be rewarded” for their efforts. Which of course he further confirmed when he and Putin were in Helsinki by not calling out those same efforts.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

1. You're arguing things that aren't relevant to my post & also completely ignoring the points I made...in an apparent hope that mass overwhelms precision.

2. NOBODY had the original "evidence" of the DNC "hack". The FBI requested it...but never got it. Comey changed his tune after demanding it.

Please provide any evidence that a government agency was able to investigate anything that wasn't second hand or "trusted" CrowdStrike's determination.

You can't because they refused to provide it.

“Mass overwhelming precision”. Well done.

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

It was mighty sporting of Trump to let Russia and the world know that he approved of the hacking and that that they “would be rewarded” for their efforts. Which of course he further confirmed when he and Putin were in Helsinki by not calling out those same efforts.

Lmao. Yeah, Trump really rewarded Russia for doing what they always do. If anything Putin wanted to create chaos and with the help of our Fed LE community, a corrupt intel community and admin as well as sheep TDS sufferers, it worked better than he could have ever dreamed. We've destroyed the rule of law in less than 5 yrs trying to pin something on a threat to the bureaucracy and the status quo. The Soviets once had a name for the easily manipulated and Im sure Putin finds these folks just as useful today.

 

[willdup]

Lmao. Yeah, Trump really rewarded Russia for doing what they always do. If anything Putin wanted to create chaos and with the help of our Fed LE community, a corrupt intel community and admin as well as sheep TDS sufferers, it worked better than he could have ever dreamed. We've destroyed the rule of law in less than 5 yrs trying to pin something on a threat to the bureaucracy and the status quo. The Soviets once had a name for the easily manipulated and Im sure Putin finds these folks just as useful today.

Ok. Here are my sources. What are yours?

• 
  The Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of January 2017, which was produced by the CIA, FBI, and NSA, concluded with high or moderate confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign aimed at the election, and that he and the Russian government had developed a clear preference for Trump over Clinton12.

• The Senate Intelligence Committee, which conducted a bipartisan review of the ICA, agreed with its conclusions and found no reason to dispute the intelligence community’s findings. The committee also confirmed that Russia used various methods to interfere in the election, such as hacking and releasing emails, creating and spreading fake news and propaganda, and manipulating social media platforms34.

• The Mueller report, which was the result of a special counsel investigation into Russian interference and possible coordination with the Trump campaign, also confirmed that Russia conducted a sweeping and systematic operation to interfere in the election, and that it did so in a manner that was designed to damage Clinton and boost Trump. The report found that Russia hacked and released emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Clinton campaign, and that it also created and disseminated online content that favored Trump and disparaged Clinton. The report did not establish that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its activities, but it did identify numerous contacts and links between Trump campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government .

 

[SLC_Dawg]

The more I watch the state investigation, the more I see them getting locked up and disbarred. The state investigation will pressure the judge to convict or he will be the next one in their sights.

 

[Georgia Jim]

The more I watch the state investigation, the more I see them getting locked up and disbarred. The state investigation will pressure the judge to convict or he will be the next one in their sights.

Yep...this is getting Popcorn worthy...

 

[Moosefish]

You're forcing me to do what I didn't want to do...make an uber-long post But, this isn't a simple, one-paragraph issue:

I got the timing of the hacks wrong. Point conceded. Regardless, it seems you are suggesting there was no message in Trump’s comments directly asking Russia to hack the Dem emails and saying you will be rewarded (yes, by the press, but come on) if you find them. Simply off the cuff, I guess.

1. What he actually said was "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press", i.e. 'good press coverage', which is something that Trump has always focused on. Again, the only hacking that occurred was all before his comments & no reported successful attempts occurred after them through the 2016 election. All 'releases' were from the same hack that occurred prior to Trump being the presumptive nominee.

You keep tying this one public comment as some proof of a grand conspiracy of Trump/Russia. But, the timelines don't add up. It was a stupid, mindless comment trying to stir up/refocus the issue on Hillary's server, which hadn't been dismissed by the FBI yet. As @Dirty Hairy Dawg pointed out above, it was about Hillary's subpoenaed emails.

Russian hacking attempts for the 2016 election cycle began in 2015, before Trump was the Republican nominee. According to reports, an FBI agent contacted the DNC in September 2015 to notify them of hacking, possibly tied to Russia. The DNC acknowledged that the employee didn’t return the agent’s subsequent calls. Interestingly, hackers were also attempting to enter the RNC’s systems.

Around this same time the DNC hired cybersecurity consultants from Good Harbor Security Risk Management, which provided a list of recommendations for improving DNC cybersecurity. The DNC failed to take action on any of the consultants’ recommendations. Although Russian hackers were allegedly already in the DNC network at the time, Good Harbor did not discover any hackers in its review.

In December 2015, a firewall issue at the DNC allowed Sanders campaign to access Clinton voter data. This led to a huge disagreement when his campaign lost its access to the data, leading to them suing the DNC.

Subsequently, the DNC hired CrowdStrike in early 2016, which released their findings about the Sanders issue in April 2016, with no mention of anything Russia.

But suddenly days later, CrowdStrike allegedly found evidence of Russian hackers in the DNC’s computers, after the hackers had accessed opposition research on Trump. CrowdStrike and the DNC did not publicly claim Russian hacking until mid-June of 2016.

On June 12, 2016, WikiLeaks announced that he had Hillary documents. On June 14, the DNC released news of the hacking, blaming Russia.

At the DNC between April, when the Russian hacking was allegedly discovered, and June, when news of the hacking went public, CrowdStrike cleaned or replaced all of the DNC servers. So, direct confirmation of the DNC hack did not come from the FBI...only from CrowdStrike.

According to Comey, the FBI made “multiple requests at different levels” to examine the DNC servers, but the DNC refused. Ultimately, the FBI allowed CrowdStrike to report to the FBI what it found in the DNC servers. For something this important....it's beyond ridiculous that it was allowed to happen. Checking out the DNC servers, especially with an election and national security at stake, should be the FBI’s job.

Additionally, CrowdStrike had incentives that conflict with their assessment. They were being paid by the DNC, not taxpayers, it had a clear incentive to report whatever the DNC wanted it to report. The DNC had a political incentive to blame the hacking on Russia, which allowed Clinton falsely claim that the documents were heavily doctored or even wholly manufactured, then attack Trump as a Putin stooge to instead of discussing the hacked documents.

More importantly, CrowdStrike had a monetary incentive to find something big to get bigger and better contracts. To quote Jeffrey Carr, a cybersecurity expert and Army War College lecturer: “The only things that pay in the cybersecurity world are claims of attribution. Which foreign government attacked you? If you are critical of the attack, you make zero money. CrowdStrike is the poster child for companies that operate like this.”

Remember the years-ago Sony hack, blamed on North Korea? CrowdStrike was sure they were behind the hack, even though cybersecurity experts pointed out the evidence was thin and it was equally likely that the “hack” was the work of an insider.

CrowdStrike has also been wrong about Russian hacking in the past. They reported in December 2016 that the same malware used in the DNC attack had infected Ukrainian devices and tracked and targeted Ukrainian units. This allowed CrowdStrike to upgrade their assessment of the DNC hack to a “high degree of certainty.”

But, there was a problem: No such “hacking” took place, and it could even be argued that by making the Ukrainian military doubt its equipment, the CrowdStrike report aided Russian-backed rebels. CrowdStrike was criticized by the Ukrainian government and cybersecurity experts as a result.

After the election, the Obama administration conducted a review of Russian meddling released in December 2016. Matt Taibbi (at Rolling Stone at that time) called the report “long on jargon and short on specifics.”

Dan Goodin at Ars Technica summed it up: “Instead of providing smoking guns that the Russian government was behind specific hacks, it largely restates previous private-sector claims without providing any support for their validity. Even worse, it provides an effective bait and switch by promising newly declassified intelligence into Russian hackers’ ‘tradecraft and techniques’ and instead delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups.”

The two pages that did cover the supposed Russian hack of the DNC, cybersecurity and intelligence experts widely said the report was underwhelming at best.

Robert Lee, former AF cyberwarfare officer and cybersecurity fellow, believes the report was likely rushed.

A DNI report from January 2017 was widely held by experts to be underwhelming at best.

It was mighty sporting of Trump to let Russia and the world know that he approved of the hacking and that that they “would be rewarded” for their efforts. Which of course he further confirmed when he and Putin were in Helsinki by not calling out those same efforts.

As I verbosely covered above, Trump was 100 percent correct when he said there was lack of proof that Russia was behind the release of DNC emails and files to WikiLeaks, or the phishing of John Podesta’s email (which is exactly what he was asked about in Helsinki).

Was he supposed to challenge Putin right there? He certainly could have. But, similarly, why has Biden not challenged Xi for proven human rights violations, US intellectual property theft, etc. during face-to-face visits? Why did he sell a huge portion of our Strategic Oil Reserve to China? (Maybe we should look into actual $ paid to the Biden family from Chinese gov't-related energy firms?)

What about the State Department under Hillary Clinton denying requests to sanction Russia in 2010, and weeks later Bill going to Moscow to deliver a $500,000 speech? Bloomberg was set to report on this timeline five years later as the Hillary campaign started, but her campaign intervened and prevented it from publishing the story.

Hillary opposed Russia sanctions in 2010 when he was paid to give a speech at a Russian bank connected to a fraud case.....after he gave the speech, Putin called him to say thanks!

From a memo released by WikiLeaks: "With the help of the research team, we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link HRC’s opposition to the Magnitsky bill a $500,000 speech that WJC gave in Moscow," Jesse Lehrich, (member of Hillary's Communications team), said on May 21, 2015.

...but, no. The big issue here is Trump making a public statement about "lost" emails when answering a question about alleged Russian hacking. That's the big controversy here, fueling "All-Things Russia".

EDIT/ADD: What you're essentially arguing here is that Trump begged Russia to hack stuff/interfere...and the biggest, verifiable action they took after that was to....buy Facebook ads? Troll Facebook?

So everything documented in the Mueller Report and the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Report on Russian Interference is incorrect? The Muller indictments of GRU agents unwarranted? The social media efforts didn’t exist or were not designed to help Trump and harm Clinton?

2. Where did I say that? You're also mixing several issues here. Bottom line: There were efforts by Russia to "help" both sides. It was not 100% "for Trump". As I addressed earlier, Putin wants chaos.

As recently discussed/revealed, the IC overwhelmingly believed Putin "wanted" Hillary. Yet, Brennan overrode that, called Trump a "threat", and directed IC & foreign assets to target members of Trump's team....setting off the entire Russian narrative, which Hillary ran with even falsely accusing Trump of having a 'secret server' connected to a Russian bank.

When "helping" Trump caused chaos, that's what he did, in obvious and elementary ways (e.g. cheap Facebook ads) It drove (and still drives) the narrative. So, now to throw more chaos...he comes out in 'favor' of Biden. Putin is a lot of bad things, but stupid isn't one of them. He's playing us & our free press...some with clear political reasons to push narratives.

Paul Manafort wasn’t deemed a severe counterintelligence threat due to his ties to Russia?

3. He was literally fired for not telling the campaign about it before being hired. As recently revealed, everyone else's "contact" was set up by IC/foreign governments in a sort of entrapment so that further (illegal) FISA warrants could be awarded, and political narratives pushed.

Ultimately, it seems you are claiming that Russia was not attempting to help Trump, despite that being the conclusion of every government agency that’s analyzed events.

4. The same agencies that determined Russia preferred Hillary, but was ignored by Brennan? Some of those same intel officials that "determined" that Hunter's laptop was Russian interference? Were all their actions 100% for Trump?

No. Again, it's for chaos, for Putin's own personal, internal benefit: "...plenty that were pro-Trump, but in the early stages of the campaign, the ads were more focused on creating controversy and division than on supporting any one candidate. And that’s the idea—to reveal an America riven by different and irreconcilable points of view, to show modern democracy as a dysfunctional mess...they use our own bias for “objectivity” against us: They know American media will dutifully report Russian fictions."

Edit: Dem emails were released the same day the Washington Post broke the story of the P**sygrab tape, but it was the third tranche and not the first. That only mildly impacts my point regarding the timing of the release.

No, it completely impacts it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but have you not claimed that Russia released them to dull the impact of that tape? That's difficult to justify since that tranche was a known release date vs. the tape being released with no prior warning. My argument is that it completely contradicts your assertion, unless Russia somehow foretold the future & forced Wikileaks to announce when it would be released, knowing that the tape would be released the same day. That doesn't follow basic logic.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

Yep...this is getting Popcorn worthy...

Agreed. If the case itself is moving forward, I don't know why Trump wouldn't want these clowns in charge of the prosecution. I sure as hell do, if for no other reason it is must watch TV watching Fani play attorney.

Used to be that prosecutors were drawn to that line of work because they had a passion to use law skills to go get the bad guy. The fact that it has become a political pawn used to do exactly the opposite nowadays is the saddest thing to see, and clear as day now that light has shone on Clarke Co, Fulton Co, NYC (Trump fraud case), etc. Not to mention all the criminals released and running the streets. For all the attention on Presidential elecitons, it can easily be argued that this political DA dynamic has a bigger effect on lives.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

You're forcing me to do what I didn't want to do...make an uber-long post But, this isn't a simple, one-paragraph issue:



1. What he actually said was "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press", i.e. 'good press coverage', which is something that Trump has always focused on. Again, the only hacking that occurred was all before his comments & no reported successful attempts occurred after them through the 2016 election. All 'releases' were from the same hack that occurred prior to Trump being the presumptive nominee.

You keep tying this one public comment as some proof of a grand conspiracy of Trump/Russia. But, the timelines don't add up. It was a stupid, mindless comment trying to stir up/refocus the issue on Hillary's server, which hadn't been dismissed by the FBI yet. As @Dirty Hairy Dawg pointed out above, it was about Hillary's subpoenaed emails.

Russian hacking attempts for the 2016 election cycle began in 2015, before Trump was the Republican nominee. According to reports, an FBI agent contacted the DNC in September 2015 to notify them of hacking, possibly tied to Russia. The DNC acknowledged that the employee didn’t return the agent’s subsequent calls. Interestingly, hackers were also attempting to enter the RNC’s systems.

Around this same time the DNC hired cybersecurity consultants from Good Harbor Security Risk Management, which provided a list of recommendations for improving DNC cybersecurity. The DNC failed to take action on any of the consultants’ recommendations. Although Russian hackers were allegedly already in the DNC network at the time, Good Harbor did not discover any hackers in its review.

In December 2015, a firewall issue at the DNC allowed Sanders campaign to access Clinton voter data. This led to a huge disagreement when his campaign lost its access to the data, leading to them suing the DNC.

Subsequently, the DNC hired CrowdStrike in early 2016, which released their findings about the Sanders issue in April 2016, with no mention of anything Russia.

But suddenly days later, CrowdStrike allegedly found evidence of Russian hackers in the DNC’s computers, after the hackers had accessed opposition research on Trump. CrowdStrike and the DNC did not publicly claim Russian hacking until mid-June of 2016.

On June 12, 2016, WikiLeaks announced that he had Hillary documents. On June 14, the DNC released news of the hacking, blaming Russia.

At the DNC between April, when the Russian hacking was allegedly discovered, and June, when news of the hacking went public, CrowdStrike cleaned or replaced all of the DNC servers. So, direct confirmation of the DNC hack did not come from the FBI...only from CrowdStrike.

According to Comey, the FBI made “multiple requests at different levels” to examine the DNC servers, but the DNC refused. Ultimately, the FBI allowed CrowdStrike to report to the FBI what it found in the DNC servers. For something this important....it's beyond ridiculous that it was allowed to happen. Checking out the DNC servers, especially with an election and national security at stake, should be the FBI’s job.

Additionally, CrowdStrike had incentives that conflict with their assessment. They were being paid by the DNC, not taxpayers, it had a clear incentive to report whatever the DNC wanted it to report. The DNC had a political incentive to blame the hacking on Russia, which allowed Clinton falsely claim that the documents were heavily doctored or even wholly manufactured, then attack Trump as a Putin stooge to instead of discussing the hacked documents.

More importantly, CrowdStrike had a monetary incentive to find something big to get bigger and better contracts. To quote Jeffrey Carr, a cybersecurity expert and Army War College lecturer: “The only things that pay in the cybersecurity world are claims of attribution. Which foreign government attacked you? If you are critical of the attack, you make zero money. CrowdStrike is the poster child for companies that operate like this.”

Remember the years-ago Sony hack, blamed on North Korea? CrowdStrike was sure they were behind the hack, even though cybersecurity experts pointed out the evidence was thin and it was equally likely that the “hack” was the work of an insider.

CrowdStrike has also been wrong about Russian hacking in the past. They reported in December 2016 that the same malware used in the DNC attack had infected Ukrainian devices and tracked and targeted Ukrainian units. This allowed CrowdStrike to upgrade their assessment of the DNC hack to a “high degree of certainty.”

But, there was a problem: No such “hacking” took place, and it could even be argued that by making the Ukrainian military doubt its equipment, the CrowdStrike report aided Russian-backed rebels. CrowdStrike was criticized by the Ukrainian government and cybersecurity experts as a result.

After the election, the Obama administration conducted a review of Russian meddling released in December 2016. Matt Taibbi (at Rolling Stone at that time) called the report “long on jargon and short on specifics.”

Dan Goodin at Ars Technica summed it up: “Instead of providing smoking guns that the Russian government was behind specific hacks, it largely restates previous private-sector claims without providing any support for their validity. Even worse, it provides an effective bait and switch by promising newly declassified intelligence into Russian hackers’ ‘tradecraft and techniques’ and instead delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups.”

The two pages that did cover the supposed Russian hack of the DNC, cybersecurity and intelligence experts widely said the report was underwhelming at best.

Robert Lee, former AF cyberwarfare officer and cybersecurity fellow, believes the report was likely rushed.

A DNI report from January 2017 was widely held by experts to be underwhelming at best.




As I verbosely covered above, Trump was 100 percent correct when he said there was lack of proof that Russia was behind the release of DNC emails and files to WikiLeaks, or the phishing of John Podesta’s email (which is exactly what he was asked about in Helsinki).

Was he supposed to challenge Putin right there? He certain could have. But, similarly, why has Biden not challenged Xi for proven human rights violations, US intellectual property theft, etc. during face-to-face visits? Why did he sell a huge portion of our Strategic Oil Reserve to China? (Maybe we should look into actual $ paid to the Biden family from Chinese gov't-related energy firms?)

What about the State Department under Hillary Clinton denying requests to sanction Russia in 2010, and weeks later Bill going to Moscow to deliver a $500,000 speech? Bloomberg was set to report on this timeline five years later as the Hillary campaign started, but her campaign intervened and prevented it from publishing the story.

Hillary opposed Russia sanctions in 2010 when he was paid to give a speech at a Russian bank connected to a fraud case.....after he gave the speech, Putin called him to say thanks!

From a memo was released by WikiLeaks: "With the help of the research team, we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link HRC’s opposition to the Magnitsky bill a $500,000 speech that WJC gave in Moscow," Jesse Lehrich, (member of Hillary's Communications team), said on May 21, 2015.

...but, no. The big issue here is Trump making a public statement about "lost" emails when answering a question about alleged Russian hacking. That's the big controversy here, fueling "All-Things Russia".


2. Where did I say that? You're also mixing several issues here. Bottom line: There were efforts by Russia to "help" both sides. It was not 100% "for Trump". As I addressed earlier, Putin wants chaos.

As recently discussed/revealed, the IC overwhelmingly believed Putin "wanted" Hillary. Yet, Brennan overrode that, called Trump a "threat", and directed IC & foreign assets to target members of Trump's team....setting off the entire Russian narrative, which Hillary ran with even falsely accusing Trump of having a 'secret server' connected to a Russian bank.

When "helping" Trump caused chaos, that's what he did, in obvious and elementary ways (e.g. cheap Facebook ads) It drove (and still drives) the narrative. So, now to throw more chaos...he comes out in 'favor' of Biden. Putin is a lot of bad things, but stupid isn't one of them. He's playing us & our free press...some with clear political reasons to push narratives.




3. He was literally fired for not telling the campaign about it before being hired. As recently revealed, everyone else's "contact" was set up by IC/foreign governments in a sort of entrapment so that further (illegal) FISA warrants could be awarded, and political narratives pushed.



4. The same agencies that determined Russia preferred Hillary, but was ignored by Brennan? Some of those same intel officials that "determined" that Hunter's laptop was Russian interference? Were all their actions 100% for Trump?

No. Again, it's for chaos, for Putin's own personal, internal benefit: "...plenty that were pro-Trump, but in the early stages of the campaign, the ads were more focused on creating controversy and division than on supporting any one candidate. And that’s the idea—to reveal an America riven by different and irreconcilable points of view, to show modern democracy as a dysfunctional mess...they use our own bias for “objectivity” against us: They know American media will dutifully report Russian fictions."




No, it completely impacts it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but have you not claimed that Russia released them to dull the impact of that tape? That's difficult to justify since that tranche was a known release date vs. the tape being released with no prior warning. My argument is that it completely contradicts your assertion, unless Russia somehow foretold the future & forced Wikileaks to announce when it would be released, knowing that the tape would be released the same day. That doesn't follow basic logic.

willdup if you can't at least acknowledge some merit and hat in hand say "nice job here", and even if you still believes what you believe about Trump, not give some credence to someone who has some expertise and history in this area, and God forbid maybe concede a little bit of your argument - your credibility is in question.

I don't know anything about this issue really. Objectively, Moose is impressive with his command here and makes relevant points rather than data-dumping a bunch of stuff to create the image of command.

 

[poorpreacher]

Agreed. If the case itself is moving forward, I don't know why Trump wouldn't want these clowns in charge of the prosecution. I sure as hell do, if for no other reason it is must watch TV watching Fani play attorney.

Used to be that prosecutors were drawn to that line of work because they had a passion to use law skills to go get the bad guy. The fact that it has become a political pawn used to do exactly the opposite nowadays is the saddest thing to see, and clear as day now that light has shone on Clarke Co, Fulton Co, NYC (Trump fraud case), etc. Not to mention all the criminals released and running the streets. For all the attention on Presidential elecitons, it can easily be argued that this political DA dynamic has a bigger effect on lives.

My concern would be the jury.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

My concern would be the jury.

I don't think the case being dismissed entirely is on the table. If anything, I think all this stuff would work better in appeal or outright mis-trial if these prosecutors continue on.