CIA says "High Confidence" that Putin involved with Hacking

[Jimmy Higgins]

link

U.S. intelligence officials now believe with "a high level of confidence" that Russian President Vladimir Putin became personally involved in the covert Russian campaign to interfere in the U.S. presidential election, senior U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.
Two senior officials with direct access to the information say new intelligence shows that Putin personally directed how hacked material from Democrats was leaked and otherwise used. The intelligence came from diplomatic sources and spies working for U.S. allies, the officials said.
Putin's objectives were multifaceted, a high-level intelligence source told NBC News. What began as a "vendetta" against Hillary Clinton morphed into an effort to show corruption in American politics and to "split off key American allies by creating the image that [other countries] couldn't depend on the U.S. to be a credible global leader anymore," the official said.

Sure, this is hardly proof and end-game stuff, but it is a major potential revelation.

Now this wouldn't be as big of a deal, if Trump wasn't forming the most pro/comfy Russia cabinet in our history. Republicans want to investigate the leak, but I think some are starting to get scared as to where it would lead.

 

[barbos]

CNN received the evidence:

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

CNN received the evidence:

In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.

 

[barbos]

CNN received the evidence:

In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.

Dear CIA,
I have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Signed,
Saddam Hussein

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So for the rest of time anything that is claimed, we'll have WMDs tossed back at us?

In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.

Dear CIA,
I have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Signed,
Saddam Hussein

The CIA indicated that Hussein had WMDs and that there was a lack of documentation indicating they were disposed of. These statements were true.

The W Admin said these weapons were dangerous and posed a danger to the US.

 

[Elixir]

CNN received the evidence:

So did Faux Nooz:

 

[Harry Bosch]

In order to reach the level of "High confidence" there needs to be well documented evidence. This evidence will be reviewed by others. We'll see. As an FYI, you may be wise to start coming up with reasons why Putin interfering with the American election (and the word is now House seat elections were also targeted) isn't a big deal.

Dear CIA,
I have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Signed,
Saddam Hussein

Sorry, but this is urban legend bullshit that has been promoted by Trumpster. The CIA didn't tell Bush that Saddam had WMD. When they couldn't produce the evidence, Bush fired them, found new CIA advisers. Then when the successors couldn't find, he cherry picked the evidence.

 

[Deepak]

Dear CIA,
I have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Signed,
Saddam Hussein

Sorry, but this is urban legend bullshit that has been promoted by Trumpster. The CIA didn't tell Bush that Saddam had WMD. When they couldn't produce the evidence, Bush fired them, found new CIA advisers. Then when the successors couldn't find, he cherry picked the evidence.

It really is microcosmic in that the information doesn't agree with the case so it's simply ignored, in the hopes that somehow personal incredulity will amount to a sound argument if it's repeated enough times. http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/23/cia.iraq/

 

[laughing dog]

Dear CIA,
I have Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Signed,
Saddam Hussein

Sorry, but this is urban legend bullshit that has been promoted by Trumpster. The CIA didn't tell Bush that Saddam had WMD. When they couldn't produce the evidence, Bush fired them, found new CIA advisers. Then when the successors couldn't find, he cherry picked the evidence.

You are communicating with a Putin fanboy which is the functional equivalent of expecting an intelligent response from your toilet.

 

[Deepak]

You are communicating with a Putin fanboy which is the functional equivalent of expecting an intelligent response from your toilet.

Those talking Japanese bidets would actually make the second case much more likely.

 

[barbos]

Beauty of anonymous leaks is that you can leak any bullshit you want.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Beauty of anonymous leaks is that you can leak any bullshit you want.

This is getting investigated... and unlike Benghazi, this has legs. You can try to hide behind "anonymous leaks" and "fake news" but if this is true, it will be documented and there will be consequences. Potentially domestically and abroad.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Beauty of anonymous leaks is that you can leak any bullshit you want.

This is getting investigated... and unlike Benghazi, this has legs. You can try to hide behind "anonymous leaks" and "fake news" but if this is true, it will be documented and there will be consequences. Potentially domestically and abroad.

Well, it has legs for another one month and five days. Then the legs kind of abruptly fall off.

 

[barbos]

Beauty of anonymous leaks is that you can leak any bullshit you want.

This is getting investigated... and unlike Benghazi, this has legs. You can try to hide behind "anonymous leaks" and "fake news" but if this is true, it will be documented and there will be consequences. Potentially domestically and abroad.

You honestly believe that theory that CIA has any kind of credible data on Putin actually taking part in this hacking thing?
Even if they did, then what would be the point of releasing it? Since when CIA became a wikileaks? This all looks like some people at CIA who are on their way out decided to throw some BS around in a desperate attempt to elect Hillary.
Once it fails they will forget about this "investigation".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This is getting investigated... and unlike Benghazi, this has legs. You can try to hide behind "anonymous leaks" and "fake news" but if this is true, it will be documented and there will be consequences. Potentially domestically and abroad.

You honestly believe that theory that CIA has any kind of credible data on Putin actually taking part in this hacking thing?

Yes, I do. You know why? Because tens of thousands of stolen emails were leaked by a foreign body. These emails weren't stolen domestically, otherwise that person(s) would have already been arrested (see Sarah Palin Yahoo account hack story from '08). The evidence as indicated by private and Federal sources indicates the Russians were involved. Fucking around with a US election isn't something some peon office worker just does on their own.

And now with the chummy pro-Russia cabinet Trump has put together, the question isn't whether Putin is involved, but how much was the Trump team involved. There are serious federal crimes that may have been made, including Treason. This isn't going away. You can deny it all you want. The circumstantial evidence that we have available is particularly notable, forget the information the Intelligence Agencies have.

The Republicans are walking on eggshells at the moment, because they never trusted Trump and now are worried he may have just destroyed the Republican Party with a scandal that'll make Watergate look like Whitewater.

 

[barbos]

You honestly believe that theory that CIA has any kind of credible data on Putin actually taking part in this hacking thing?

Yes, I do. You know why? Because tens of thousands of stolen emails were leaked by a foreign body. These emails weren't stolen domestically, otherwise that person(s) would have already been arrested (see Sarah Palin Yahoo account hack story from '08). The evidence as indicated by private and Federal sources indicates the Russians were involved. Fucking around with a US election isn't something some peon office worker just does on their own.

You do realize that "russians did it" is so much preferrable than any truth?

And now with the chummy pro-Russia cabinet Trump has put together, the question isn't whether Putin is involved, but how much was the Trump team involved. There are serious federal crimes that may have been made, including Treason. This isn't going away. You can deny it all you want. The circumstantial evidence that we have available is particularly notable, forget the information the Intelligence Agencies have.

What do you mean pro-russian cabinet? That Oil dude OK, i will give you that, who else?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes, I do. You know why? Because tens of thousands of stolen emails were leaked by a foreign body. These emails weren't stolen domestically, otherwise that person(s) would have already been arrested (see Sarah Palin Yahoo account hack story from '08). The evidence as indicated by private and Federal sources indicates the Russians were involved. Fucking around with a US election isn't something some peon office worker just does on their own.

You do realize that "russians did it" is so much preferrable than any truth?

The CIA allegedly has names, not just "russians".

And now with the chummy pro-Russia cabinet Trump has put together, the question isn't whether Putin is involved, but how much was the Trump team involved. There are serious federal crimes that may have been made, including Treason. This isn't going away. You can deny it all you want. The circumstantial evidence that we have available is particularly notable, forget the information the Intelligence Agencies have.

What do you mean pro-russian cabinet? That Oil dude OK, i will give you that, who else?

Bannon, Lewindowski (who apparently never left the Trump team), Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn.

Oh and all the pro-Russia shit Trump has stated.

 

[barbos]

You do realize that "russians did it" is so much preferrable than any truth?

The CIA allegedly has names, not just "russians".

It does not bother you that they went from "We have no links between hackers and russian government" to " We are now sure Putin was leading the team of hackers" in a matter of days?
Let's wait for electoral college voting, shell we?

And now with the chummy pro-Russia cabinet Trump has put together, the question isn't whether Putin is involved, but how much was the Trump team involved. There are serious federal crimes that may have been made, including Treason. This isn't going away. You can deny it all you want. The circumstantial evidence that we have available is particularly notable, forget the information the Intelligence Agencies have.

What do you mean pro-russian cabinet? That Oil dude OK, i will give you that, who else?

Bannon, Lewindowski (who apparently never left the Trump team), Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn.

Oh and all the pro-Russia shit Trump has stated.

I doubt Bannon is aware of Russia's existence. So you really think Trump is some kind of Putin's Puppet? and these people are not merely raging idiots (except Michael Flynn who is actually pretty normal just has disagreements with Obama) but are some kind of traitors?

 

[Elixir]

I doubt Bannon is aware of Russia's existence.

That's pretty naive... considering that he's well known to be an avid student of history.

 

[Deepak]

The CIA allegedly has names, not just "russians".

It does not bother you that they went from "We have no links between hackers and russian government" to " We are now sure Putin was leading the team of hackers" in a matter of days?
Let's wait for electoral college voting, shell we?

A complete misstatement of the situation. The formal statement on the Russian connection was months ago, and the FBI and CIA were investigating well before that.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/cia-director-john-brennan-russian-hacking/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/u...cuses-russia-of-stealing-dnc-emails.html?_r=0