Russian Influence Campaign Details???

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond

During a live press conference broadcast from the Ecuadorian embassy in London via Twitter's livestream app Persicope, WikiLeaks' Julian Assange on Monday blasted the recent US intelligence report on Russian hacking during the 2016 election.

"It is, frankly, quite embarrassing to the reputation of the US intelligence services to be putting out something that claims to be a report like that," Assange said. "This is a press release. It is clearly designed for political effect and US intelligence have been politicized by the Obama administration in the production of this report and a number of other statements."

Assange called the report a "political attack cannon against Donald Trump" and a way "to defend the reason why the Democratic Party lost." And he claimed that its true purpose was to bolster certain officials within the Democratic Party and "delegitimize the election of Donald Trump."

Assange's press conference comes three days after the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a declassified report outlining its assessment of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign via hacks of US political targets, including the Democratic National Committee and the personal email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman. The materials were stolen from those organizations by Russian intelligence, according to the report, and then passed to WikiLeaks, but it does not specify whether this occurred through an intermediary. An online persona known as "Guccifer 2.0" claimed credit for the DNC hack and for passing the information along to WikiLeaks and also for providing the material to media outlets and reporters.

"Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self-proclaimed reputation for authenticity," the declassified report stated, adding that the material published by WikiLeaks did "not contain any evident forgeries." The report stated that Russian intelligence fed the materials to WikiLeaks but didn't say how, or whether it was through a third-party. The Washington Post reported Thursday night that US intelligence had identified the "actors" involved in getting the materials to WikiLeaks.

Assange has consistently denied that the materials came from the Russian government and addressed the issue again on Monday.

"We haven't said we know or don't know our sources," he said. "We have made one statement, which is that our sources in the US election-related matter are not a state party." Assange noted the "incredible care" with which WikiLeaks speaks about its sources, but this case "does not sufficiently threaten our sources to make this very bland disclosure." With a "state" source, however, "we would have a lot less concern in attempting to protect them."



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/julian-assange-blasts-us-intel-report-russian-hacking




assange denies they came from a "state party"


what would his motivation be to lie about that?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
looks like hillary wasn't really honest back in 2008 - or she changed her mind:


When Hillary Clinton Promised a Transparent Government During Her Failed Run for President



As a candidate for president in 2008, Hillary Clinton promised a more open and transparent government.

“Well, number one, I want to have a much more transparent government, and I think we now have the tools to make that happen,” Clinton said.

“I want to have as much information about the way our government operates on the Internet so the people who pay for it, the taxpayers of America, can see that,” Clinton said as a presidential candidate on Meet the Press.


http://freebeacon.com/politics/when...ent-govt-during-her-failed-run-for-president/

 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Maybe, if they had lax security. And I've read that they were warned about breaches but didn't take much action on it. Doubted the warnings.

The same Lady with the private server when she was Sec. State.
That got investigated over and over where she was found to be "Extremely Careless".
Her Campaign got hacked.
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
DNC's. I don't remember all the content. One example was the DNC's behavior toward Bernie.
Was it an email that leaked Clinton getting a debate question ahead of time?
I think generally it was supposed to make Clinton look bad. :plain:

So the DNC rigged the Primary for Clinton and it was exposed and They want to call that hacking the election.
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
Maybe, if they had lax security. And I've read that they were warned about breaches but didn't take much action on it. Doubted the warnings.

Since Obama took office at least 12 government agencies, have been hacked, why would they doubt the credibility of the FBI warning? Again, it is hard to feel sorry for stupidity.
 

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
I've seen a lot of vaguely worded assertions - has anybody seen any specific details on what the russians are supposed to have done?

And we know that you have top security clearances and have been personally briefed by the appropriate intelligence agencies. Right?
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame

During a live press conference broadcast from the Ecuadorian embassy in London via Twitter's livestream app Persicope, WikiLeaks' Julian Assange on Monday blasted the recent US intelligence report on Russian hacking during the 2016 election.

"It is, frankly, quite embarrassing to the reputation of the US intelligence services to be putting out something that claims to be a report like that," Assange said. "This is a press release. It is clearly designed for political effect and US intelligence have been politicized by the Obama administration in the production of this report and a number of other statements."

Assange called the report a "political attack cannon against Donald Trump" and a way "to defend the reason why the Democratic Party lost." And he claimed that its true purpose was to bolster certain officials within the Democratic Party and "delegitimize the election of Donald Trump."

Assange's press conference comes three days after the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a declassified report outlining its assessment of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign via hacks of US political targets, including the Democratic National Committee and the personal email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman. The materials were stolen from those organizations by Russian intelligence, according to the report, and then passed to WikiLeaks, but it does not specify whether this occurred through an intermediary. An online persona known as "Guccifer 2.0" claimed credit for the DNC hack and for passing the information along to WikiLeaks and also for providing the material to media outlets and reporters.

"Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self-proclaimed reputation for authenticity," the declassified report stated, adding that the material published by WikiLeaks did "not contain any evident forgeries." The report stated that Russian intelligence fed the materials to WikiLeaks but didn't say how, or whether it was through a third-party. The Washington Post reported Thursday night that US intelligence had identified the "actors" involved in getting the materials to WikiLeaks.

Assange has consistently denied that the materials came from the Russian government and addressed the issue again on Monday.

"We haven't said we know or don't know our sources," he said. "We have made one statement, which is that our sources in the US election-related matter are not a state party." Assange noted the "incredible care" with which WikiLeaks speaks about its sources, but this case "does not sufficiently threaten our sources to make this very bland disclosure." With a "state" source, however, "we would have a lot less concern in attempting to protect them."



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/julian-assange-blasts-us-intel-report-russian-hacking




assange denies they came from a "state party"


what would his motivation be to lie about that?
To protect Russia and potentially keep the sources open. With all the pressure on Russia if he'd say it was a state source then that would only put more of a spotlight on Russia.
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
It was hacking. :idunno:

But Podesta didn't get hacked, he got Phished.
So if we are going to take what happened to Podesta and use that as a verb and say the Election had that done to it then the best you can say is the Election got Phished.
I guess that headline wouldn't get as many clicks?
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
I've seen a lot of vaguely worded assertions - has anybody seen any specific details on what the russians are supposed to have done?
Providing specific details would only put American intelligence sources at further risk and given that no amount of evidence would convince conservative "true believers" like "ok doser" that the Russians were attempting to influence the presidential election, what purpose would be served?

As for the lack of "specific details, that never prevented the likes of Trump and "ok doser" from conducting their own "birther" campaign against Obama over a period of 8 years - all in the attempt to undermine his legitimacy as president!
 
Last edited:

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Providing specific details would only put American intelligence sources at further risk and given that no amount of evidence would convince conservative "true believers" like "ok doser" that the Russians were attempting to influence the presidential, what purpose would be served?
It's called Evidence and it would be nice to have some for why Obama is trying to start a war with Russia in his last month in office.
As for the lack of "specific details, that never prevented the likes of Trump and "ok doser" from conducting their own "birther" campaign against Obama over a period of 8 years - all in the attempt to undermine his legitimacy as president!
Did countries expel Diplomats because of the Birther issue?
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
It was hacking. :idunno:

it was hacking an email account

i despise this new use of "hacking" to mean "anything we want it to, including solving life's problems, like how to squeeze the toothpaste tube from the end to get all of it out"



if they "hacked" the election, that suggests they accessed the voting computers and gave additional votes to trump
 
Top