There is much hand-wringing and consternation over the Trump-Putin presser. No response was more over the top than that of John Brennan:
Donald Trump’s press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of “high crimes & misdemeanors.” It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump’s comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin. Republican Patriots: Where are you???
— John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) July 16, 2018
We have told over and over and over that the Russians were trying to hack the election. Today Ezra Klein wrote that the 2016 election was “sabotaged.”
But who has seen the proof? Have you?
We were told over and over that 17 agencies agreed on the assessment. That was a lie.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper does not know what caused the now-debunked claim that all 17 intelligence agencies backed an assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to spread.
Clapper discussed the matter on CNN on Thursday evening, prompted by comments earlier in the day from President Donald Trump.
While in Warsaw, Poland for the G-20 summit, Trump was asked about the intelligence community’s assessment that Russia interfered in the election and his doubts about Moscow’s role. Trump challenged the popular “17 agencies” figure, pointing out that it had been shown to be false.
“It turned out to be three or four. It wasn’t 17,” he said.
But who’s on that list?
Comey- who hated Trump
Brennan- who hates Trump
Clapper- who hates Trump
On what evidence was the assessment made? The FBI was never allowed to examine the DNC servers.
The Democratic National Committee “rebuffed” a request from the FBI to examine its computer services after it was allegedly hacked by Russia during the 2016 election, a senior law enforcement official told CNN Thursday.
“The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated,” a senior law enforcement official told CNN. “This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier.”
Later, the DNC would claim that the FBI never requested access to the servers.
“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and US Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” Eric Walker, the DNC’s deputy communications director, told BuzzFeed News.
Today saw some media hacks trying to rewrite the story:
https://twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1018890695946440705
So who is everyone depending on for the Russian connection?
Crowdstrike
Crowdstrike has a credibility problem:
WASHINGTON — An influential British think tank and Ukraine’s military are disputing a report that the U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has used to buttress its claims of Russian hacking in the presidential election.
The CrowdStrike report, released in December, asserted that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, resulting in heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine’s war with Russian-backed separatists.
But the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) told VOA that CrowdStrike erroneously used IISS data as proof of the intrusion. IISS disavowed any connection to the CrowdStrike report. Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense also has claimed combat losses and hacking never happened.
A CrowdStrike spokesperson told VOA that it stands by its findings, which, they say, “have been confirmed by others in the cybersecurity community.”
The challenges to CrowdStrike’s credibility are significant because the firm was the first to link last year’s hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors, and because CrowdStrike co-founder Dimiti Alperovitch has trumpeted its Ukraine report as more evidence of Russian election tampering.
The Crowdstrike report, titled “Use of Fancy Bear Android Malware in Tracking of Ukrainian Field Artillery Units“, was issued by the company on December 22, 2016. It’s a slickly produced document, with a frightening comic book-style cover and plenty of charts and graphs. Crowdstrike’s villain in the report is Fancy Bear, which they say is a hacking group controlled by Russia’s GRU intelligence agency. Crowdstrike itself gave the group the name Fancy Bear, with ‘Bear’ referring to Russia and ‘Fancy’ referring to the song Fancy by Iggy Izalea.
On June 15, 2016 Crowdstrike claimed that Fancy Bear was behind the DNC hacks in an article title Bears in the Midst: Intrusion into the Democratic National Committee. That post came the day after the Washington Post published an article claiming Russian government hackers penetrated DNC and stole opposition research on Trump, quoting Crowdstrike’s co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch, who is scheduled to testify Monday in front of the House Intel committee hearing. In that June WaPo article, Alperovitch seemed unsure on details but pinned the hack on Fancy Bear:
CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with “spearphishing” emails. These are communications that appear legitimate — often made to look like they came from a colleague or someone trusted — but that contain links or attachments that when clicked on deploy malicious software that enables a hacker to gain access to a computer. “But we don’t have hard evidence,” Alperovitch said. The two groups did not appear to be working together, Alperovitch said. Fancy Bear is believed to work for the GRU, or Russia’s military intelligence service, he said.
Let us repeat a relevant portion:
“But we don’t have hard evidence,”
Thus the only basis for the assessment may never have happened.
And, BTW, who was in charge when all this was allegedly going on? Obama, Brennan, Clapper and Comey. And let’s not forget that it was the obama administration who issued a “stand down” order in response to alleged Russian cyber attacks.
Now why would they do that?
Here are some things we DO know
- obama promised to be more flexible for Putin
- Clapper lied to Congress
- Brennan spied on the Senate and lied about it
- the obama administration issued a stand down order in response to alleged Russian cyber attacks.
- Comey’s FBI never examined the DNC servers
- The DNC servers have vanished
Mollie Hemingway reminds us of something obama said:
Obama on Putin meddling in our election: "He denies it. So the idea that somehow public shaming is gonna be effective, I think doesn't read the thought process in Russia very well.” https://t.co/9gexI6YLVW
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) July 16, 2018
Andy McCarthy points out that Rod Rosenstein screwed the pooch with the indictments of the Russians:
What there will be, though, is a new international order in which nation-states are encouraged to file criminal charges against each other’s officials for actions deemed to be provocative (or, more accurately, actions that can be exploited for domestic political purposes). Of all government officials in the world, American officials are the most active on the global stage — and that includes meddling in other countries’ elections. I doubt our diplomats, intelligence operatives, elected officials, and citizens will much like living in the world Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein have given us. If the idea was to give Vladimir Putin and his thug regime a new way to sabotage the United States, nice work.
All day I have watched the screeching anguish of liberals moaning that Trump does not side with the American intelligence community.
Why should he?
Brennan hated and hates Trump.
Comey hated and hates Trump.
Strzok rigged investigations against Trump
McCabe did the same
Clapper hated and hates Trump
All US intelligence agencies were out to take Trump down. Someone tell me why, when every intel agency outside the NSA was out to get Trump that he should trust them and the assessment of a firm hired by the DNC? Why should he trust the assessment of those who created a fake dossier?
If not for Mike Rogers, they would have framed Trump long ago.
What Trump has done is throw done the gauntlet. You say it’s Russians?
PROVE IT.
Produce the servers and let the FBI examine them. CrowdStrike had “no hard evidence” and their findings weren’t solid.
The left is making some serious accusations. PROVE THEM, you gutless cowards.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@Kitt: I keep noticing those who run from answering questions keep asking them and expect answers. Have you seen any answers? For instance, what did Obama mean by “flexible”? Should there be an investigation into the $400,000 Hillary got from the Russians? What aren’t their standards the same for Democrat and Republican administrations?
The questions, of course, are merely elementary. We know the answers. Hypocrisy. It’s always hypocrisy. Cynical, self-serving hypocrisy.
@retire05, #45:
I don’t see the point of that question. US and UK forces moved against Nazi Germany from the west; Russia moved against Nazi Germany from the east. US and UK forces never occupied the territory that Stalin kept. There was nothing US and UK forces occupied that FDR “turned over” to Russia.
Given that we were still fighting a war in the Pacific with Japan, and invasion of the islands could have easily cost over a million additional American lives (see Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s casualty estimate), militarily pushing Russian forces back across the Russian borders wasn’t really much of an option. FDR died three months before the Trinity bomb test, so that wasn’t part of the calculation. No one knew for certain if the damn thing would even work.
@Deplorable Me: The whole article asks WHY perhaps Richard could give us a reason to believe or trust them.
Kitt and Bill–MY #49 directed to AV for his studied opinion and possible clarification of DT’S recent statements. Thanks
Conservative host Ingraham suggests DT address the nation to clarify his beliefs re intelligence community , Russian interference and Putin talks . Other Conservatives concur, as do I.
@Richard Wheeler: Dodge, why should Trump trust these guys? I dont care what Fox news says.
Our last prsident sold arms to terrorists and gave 1.3 billion to a terrorist regime, Trump has a chat with Putin and now the world is coming to an end…really seriously???????
@Kitt: Which guys? his appointees Coates, Wray, Pompeo?–pls clarify what you mean–Trump should do the same..
Remember his BS only works on his 40% base—currently less, as some Conservative supporters like Ingraham and Gingrich want clarification
@Greg:
That’s a dodge. And out. The war was against Germany, Italy and Japan. Not Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Romania or Hungary. So, while all the territory the US and Britain liberated was returned to it former leadership, there was an expectation the Soviet Union would do the same. Stalin, of course, intended to keep everything he “liberated”, but the purpose of the War was not to replace one dictator for another. But, Roosevelt simply looked the other way while Stalin did just that.
Obama did the same thing. More importantly, the left didn’t blink an eye. Yet, when Trump stands firm against Russia, he is expected to stand MORE firm. When he stands firm do demand our allies BE allies and dedicate a proportional commitment to the defense of their own territory as we do, he is being a bully.
Bottom line is, you liberals don’t want peace, war, prosperity or poverty. You want LIBERALISM and you don’t even know why.
@Kitt:
Not only armed terrorists, but released terrorists we had captured back into the battle. He also denied terrorism exists in the form of radical Islamic terrorism. Obama did nothing that supported the United States that was not imperative to the survival of his own personal political future. Obama, in his pledge to Putin to do whatever he wanted, when he was sure no one else could hear his pledge, committed a worse infraction than everything the left has even ACCUSED Trump of.
@Deplorable Me, #57:
Meanwhile, back in reality, there was the fact that the Russian armies occupied the territories to the west of the line along which US, UK, and Soviet forces at last met, and we still had a very difficult war in the Pacific to think about.
Our alliance with the Soviets was not based on any illusions. We had no control over Stalin’s intentions. It was how we took advantage of Hitler’s fatal military miscalculation. FDR was a pragmatist. He was not about to repeat Hitler’s mistake.
I have no use whatsoever for the right’s historical revisionism—be it this, or the assertion that the Founding Fathers wanted to elevate some particular religion, or the goofball premise that the Civil War wasn’t really about slavery. I know damn well that they didn’t want a plutocracy, and would have been horrified at the push to turn money into political power. They would have scoffed at the idea that a corporation should have the rights of a person. They would have pushed back any efforts to put a president above the reach of the law.
@Greg:
FDR was a fan of Stalin’s. History has proven that out.
Idiots like you just don’t want to accept that so you can continue to think that FDR was the greatest thing since sliced bread when FDR was just slightly right of a Socialist.
@Greg:
We would also have the nuclear weapon. We also had a gigantic army in the field and an economy that had been unscathed by war. We had Germans that would have fought with us, as well.
Speaking of reality, had Hitler played his cards better in the East, if instead of murdering citizens he freed them, the Soviet Union could very well have collapsed from within. German troops were welcomed as liberators. Yes, they had just won a war defending the Motherland from the Hun, but the same could still have been accomplished if we had decided to defend Eastern Europe. Stalin being an overwhelming force is not a forgone conclusion.
FDR was a better friend to Stalin than Stalin was to him. Obama, on the other hand, was simply a coward and THAT is a fact. What, other than the obvious and apparent message, do you think Obama meant by sending the message to Putin that he would be “more flexible” as soon as he no longer worried about the will of the voters? And what about an investigation into Hillary’s $400,000 Russian windfall?
Pardon me if I quote myself:
They really didn’t know for certain what would happen when the first bomb was detonated. Guesses ranged from a fizzle to the very remote possibility of a chain reaction in the atmosphere that would incinerate the planet.
Uh, no. An estimated 20 millions Russians, both military and civilians, died as a result of the Nazi invasion. There were more civilians deaths than military.
@Greg:
Without going into an extended lesson in literature, “We WOULD have”. Not “We HAD”. Were the Soviets working on a bomb? Nope. We knew the Japanese and Germans were, but not the Soviets. They would have to wait until we finished it to steal it; repressive socialist regimes don’t innovate well.
At any rate, the bottom line is that some Democrat regimes are quick and easy to appease aggression, almost as quick and easy as they are to accuse others of doing the same.
Uh, yeah. They were. The first waves of Wermacht forces were showered with flowers and greeted as liberators. Not until the mass executions began did the populace turn on the Germans. Read up on it, ace. The Stalinist regime was brutal and people were starved. They HATED Stalin. People denied freedoms are easy to turn, something you leftists always seem to lose sight of.
I think you’re referring to Estonia, not Russia.
@Greg: No way Russian citizens in Moscow greeted German troops after the incredible battlefield losses they’d incurred. Losses on both sides were massive.
FDR AND CHURCHILL were great leaders that knew how to motivate their citizens and their militaries.
@Richard Wheeler, #64:
Yeah, it’s complete nonsense.
Estonia briefly welcomed the Nazis. Estonia had been invaded by the USSR only one year before, and initially thought the enemy of my enemy is my friend. They soon found out differently. As foreign oppressors go, the Nazis were arguably much worse.
@Greg: I think I’m referring to along the entire front. Let Wheeler know the Germans never made it to Moscow.