Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( sounds like there is going to be some sort of senate investigation in this , which to me sounds rather bizarre , what are they honestly expecting to find ? how are they going to prove the Russians did anything ? even if Russians hacked into Podesta's emails how do they prove they gave them to wikileaks ? or such , why aren't they investigating the claims made by wikileaks from those emails to see if there true or not ? did Hilary really do all the things wikileaks claimed ? if so she must of broke some laws along the way )



M. Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO

McConnell backs congressional investigation into Russian interference

'It defies belief that somehow Republicans in the Senate are reluctant to either review Russian tactics or ignore them,' McConnell says.

By Seung Min Kim and Burgess Everett
| 12/12/16 10:13 AM EST
| Updated 12/12/16 12:17 PM EST


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) backed calls for a congressional probe into Russian interference in the U.S. election — throwing his support behind a growing call from Senate Republicans to investigate the issue.

But McConnell dismissed calls for a select committee specifically designated for the effort, instead indicating that the main responsibility to probe Russian meddling into the election lies with the Senate Intelligence Committee and its chairman, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.).


.
“Obviously, any foreign breach of our cybersecurity measures is disturbing, and I strongly condemn any such efforts,” McConnell told reporters at a news conference at the Capitol on Monday. "The Senate Intelligence Committee ... is more than capable of conducting a complete review of this matter."

The Senate Armed Services Committee will also play a role, with chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) directing a review on the threats posed by cyberattacks, McConnell noted. The broader Senate review, he stressed, will be done on a "bipartisan basis."

"It defies belief that somehow Republicans in the Senate are reluctant to either review Russian tactics or ignore them," McConnell said, adding later: "The Russians are not our friends."

The majority leader's comments follow an extraordinary statement Sunday from a bipartisan group of four influential senators — including McCain — who called for an investigation into Russian influence into the Nov. 8 election, warning that reports of meddling from Vladimir Putin's government should "alarm every American." And during a television appearance on Sunday, McCain said he wanted a select committee to investigate the issue.

McConnell's counterpart in the House, Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), has declined to explicitly support a congressional investigation into Russian interference.


But McConnell was typically careful and tight-lipped on the exact intelligence that U.S. officials have gleaned about Russian influence, attacking those who are leaking internal CIA and FBI assessments about the matter. Other than statements by the Director of National Intelligence made before the election about Russian interference, “anything else is irresponsible, likely illegal and potentially for partisan political gain," McConnell said.

That remark echoed a Washington Post report from Friday that said McConnell not only raised questions about the veracity of intelligence that found Russia was interfering in the election to aid Donald Trump, but that he would view any attempt from the White House to raise the issue publicly a partisan act. Outgoing Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) hinted on CNN that Republicans killed an attempt to go public with the CIA's assessment about Russian interference.

"I don't know what [McConnell] did or didn't do," Reid said on Monday. "I had a number of conversations with Pelosi, trying to write a letter that everybody would accept. We never got one done. Didn't get it done."

But on Monday, McConnell backed a “bipartisan” Senate investigation into the matter and indicated he plans to be a critic of Russia next year and hopes the Trump administration joins him.

“I hope that those who are going to be in a position of responsibility in the administration share my view" on Russia, McConnell said.

The majority leader would not say whether he believes that the Russians were trying to help Trump get elected.

Reid was more explicit and said that "if anyone can read the English language" they can tell that Russia was tipping the scales toward Trump. He repeatedly blasted Comey as a GOP "partisan" who ignored Reid's entreaties for an FBI investigation and "did nothing."

"There were reports that people in the campaign for Donald Trump were in touch with the Russians," Reid said. Asked if the Russians steered the election toward Trump, Reid said: "My opinion is yes. We got no basis in fact from the FBI. They ignored it. Now we're hearing and you guys are reporting all of this stuff from the intelligence agencies. They clearly see it."

But when asked about Trump’s dismissals of intelligence agencies’ findings about Russia, McConnell shut down further inquiries into the matter.

“I’ve already addressed my own view about where we are on those issues. And I really don't have any intention of further elaborating,” he said.

McCain, too, said Monday that he “can’t reach that conclusion” that Russia was explicitly trying to help Trump. And Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the incoming minority leader, said disagreement among intelligence agencies makes it difficult to draw a hard conclusion without an investigation.


Trump vs. Congress on Russian hacking

By Seung Min Kim and Burgess Everett


“You have the CIA saying one thing … and the FBI, something else. We need to get to the bottom of this in a fair, non-partisan, non- finger-pointing way,” Schumer said in a joint appearance with McCain on CBS. “We do not know what they have done. There is good evidence they hacked into the DNC … the people who’ve been briefed have told me this is serious and wide-ranging. let's find out.”

Later on Monday, Schumer responded warmly to McConnell's remarks backing a congressional investigation.

"This issue should not and must not turn into a political football," Schumer said Monday shortly after McConnell's press conference concluded. "It’s absolutely essential that this investigation be bipartisan, wide-ranging, and have access to all of the relevant intelligence so that we can find out how this happened, and how we can stop it from happening ever again.”

Meanwhile, McConnell declined to elaborate on Rex Tillerson, the ExxonMobil chairman and CEO who may be named Trump’s choice to serve as secretary of state but is already facing some resistance from hawkish Senate Republicans for his personal ties to Putin. The majority leader said he did not want to comment on a “phantom nominee.”

“I’ve been very impressed with the nominations so far and we’ll have to wait and see who is nominated for secretary of state,” McConnell said. “We’ll obviously treat whoever that is with respect. They’ll go through the regular process and respond to questions, and we’ll see where it comes out.”

He also added that he expects the Obama administration to release more information about the hacking once the DNI completes its review.

Asked about McConnell’s backing of a congressional inquiry, Trump spokesman Jason Miller dismissed claims of Russian influence as a media-driven “attempt to try to delegitimize” Trump’s November victory. He did not comment on McConnell’s backing of the probe.

Matthew Nussbaum contributed to this report.

http://www.politico.com/story/.....nce-232504
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Elector push for Russia briefing heats up after Podesta fans flames



Adam Shaw

By Adam Shaw
·Published December 14, 2016
· FoxNews.com



A push by restive electors for a briefing on alleged Russian interference in the U.S. election is growing after Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman poured fuel on the fire by endorsing the call – as some Donald Trump foes continue to hold out hope they can deny the president-elect the office he won.

John Podesta, whose emails were leaked to the front pages of news outlets across the country via WikiLeaks in the last months of the campaign, did not directly call on electors to flip their vote. He merely backed the demand by a handful of them for an intelligence briefing on Russia involvement.

“Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed,” he said in a statement Monday.

Since then, however, a total of 55 mostly Democratic electors have now signed onto the open letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

“We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States,” the letter says.

Those on the letter are not all necessarily part of an effort to get Republican electors to defect from Trump and back an alternative. The Electoral College is set to meet Monday to affirm Trump's Nov. 8 win, and attempts to deny the president-elect a formal victory at that time stand little chance of succeeding.

Still, the focus on Russia interference could serve to stir some drama on Dec. 19.

The call for an intelligence briefing is being led by Christine Pelosi, the daughter of House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi -- who has been under fire over her party's poor showing in November, and who recently swatted off a leadership challenge.


The letter follows the The Washington Post reporting Friday that the CIA has “high confidence” the Russian government tried to help the Trump campaign. But so far, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has not embraced the CIA finding.

Even if the call for a briefing is successful, it would only be one step on a long and arduous path to denying Trump the 270 votes needed to take the White House.

Trump won 306 electoral votes, and his opponents would need to convince 37 Republican electors to defect. So far only one – Chris Suprun of Texas – has said he will do so. Suprun was the only Republican elector to sign on to the Pelosi letter.

Harvard constitutional law Professor Larry Lessig, who briefly ran as a candidate for the 2016 Democratic Party nomination and who has set up a legal group “The Electors Trust” to offer legal counsel to anti-Trump electors, told FoxNews.com he believes there are at least 20 GOP electors seriously considering changing their vote. He conceded he thinks most will only vote against Trump if they believe they have 37 Republican electors ready to jump ship.

“I’m confident there are about 20 ... seriously considering it,” he said. “There are some who will do it as a matter of principle; one has already said he will. But most will be in the situation where they won’t make that sacrifice unless there a reason to sacrifice.”

The plan, being pushed by a group calling themselves “The Hamilton Electors,” seeks to unite Republican and Democratic electors around a compromise Republican candidate and deny Trump 270 votes. Should no candidate hit 270, the vote would go to the House of Representatives in what is known as a “contingent election.” The Hamilton Electors hope that House Republicans would then pick the alternative Republican over Trump.

After reports that Ohio Gov. John Kasich was being considered as a third-way candidate, Kasich tweeted asking electors not to vote for him and declaring: “The election is over.”

Lessig acknowledges there is little chance of the effort succeeding, but says that things could change if the Russian narrative heats up.

“This is a low probability event and I don’t see anything right now that indicates a high chance that it will change immediately. But a lot is happening,” he said.

Should the rogue electors deny Trump the votes, it would be an unprecedented moment in U.S. history. There have only been 157 instances of so-called “faithless electors” for president or vice president, and no faithless electors have ever changed the outcome of an election.

Trump also dismissed claims of Russian interference, telling Fox News’ Chris Wallace that “Democrats are putting it out because they suffered one of the greatest defeats in the history of politics in this country.”

The White House has stayed well away from the Electoral College controversy, with White House press secretary Josh Earnest noting Tuesday that most electors will not have the necessary security clearance with which to access classified information.

The Electoral College is due to meet on Dec. 19, by state, in each capital. They will submit their certificates of votes, which Congress will tabulate in a Joint Session on Jan. 6.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....lames.html
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sore loser Obama turns to Russian hacking to delegitimize Trump's triumph



Liz Peek

By Liz Peek
·Published December 12, 2016
· FoxNews.com



Make no mistake: it’s payback time. In ordering up a “deep dive” into possible Russian interference in the election of Donald Trump, sore loser Barack Obama wants to delegitimize the real estate magnate’s win. His motive? Punishing Trump for the years the mogul spent publicly questioning whether Obama was an American citizen, which cast doubts on the legitimacy of his presidency. Ah, how sweet the revenge. And how pitiful.

President Obama has searched high and, increasingly, low, for the reasons he and Hillary Clinton lost the election. He has blamed Fox News, insufficient grass-roots campaigning by Hillary, “fake news”, and now has singled out Russian meddling for the loss of 194 of 207 counties that voted for him in either 2008 or 2012.

The suggestion is that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; the liberal media has hinted darkly that the president-elect and his campaign team have “ties” to the Russian head of state.

As most Americans review Trump’s defense and security picks, the notion that the new administration will go easy on our adversaries – including Russia – is laughable. Retired General James Mattis, whom Trump has nominated to head Defense, has described Russia’s annexation of Crimea as a “severe” threat, one underestimated by the Obama White House. Mattis is not to be trifled with.

The media has ignored the reality that Moscow’s possible hacking of DNC and Podesta’s emails were retaliation for Hillary Clinton’s assertions that Russian elections in 2011 were “rigged” – an accusation that infuriated Putin. When protests erupted in Russia over the election outcome, Putin blamed Clinton. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,” Putin said at the time. He accused then Secretary of State Clinton for giving “a signal” to demonstrators organized “with the support of the U.S. State Department…We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,” Putin said. Does this sound familiar? Turnabout is fair play, and Putin has made it clear that if we mess with his elections, he will mess with ours.

Obama knows this. Politico reported in a July piece entitled “Why Putin Hates Hillary” that the Russian leader’s anger about Clinton’s interference was “communicated directly to President Barack Obama.” Former administration officials involved with Russian policy say the Kremlin saw Clinton as taking a harder line against Russia – “reset” notwithstanding – than others in the White House. “And they say Putin sees Clinton as a forceful proponent of “regime change” policies that the Russian leader considers a grave threat to his own survival.”

That is why the Russians may have tried to undermine Hillary Clinton, not because they see Trump as an ally. Like most of the world, Moscow no doubt expected Clinton to win. Coming into office weakened by Putin’s meddling would have undoubtedly pleased Moscow no end.

Obama’s call for an investigation is transparently bogus. First, the CIA offers up only scant circumstantial evidence – evidence that even the New York Times admits “does not support firm judgements” -- to make the charge that Russia worked to favor Trump. The FBI isn’t even on board with the conclusion.

Second, everyone knows that no serious inquiry could possibly be completed by January 20, when Trump will be sworn in. The federal government operates with glacial pacing; Obama knows the report will likely never be completed, and so the issue of Russian hacking will hang like a cloud – like the “birther” rumors – over the Trump White House.

While muttering about how the need for “transparency” might inspire the investigation into the hacking, the Times et al ignore the reality: the emails released via WikiLeaks that outed cheating by the DNC in favor of Hillary Clinton, or showed how disrespectful her camp was of Catholics and average Americans, actually increased the transparency of the election. The United States should not tolerate cyberattacks from a foreign government; nor should we tolerate cheating in our politics.

Obama is still smarting from having put himself on the line during the campaign, telling the Black Congressional Caucus, for instance, “I will consider it a personal insult, an insult to my legacy, if this community lets down its guard and fails to activate itself in this election.”

He made Hillary’s campaign all about him, but she lost anyway. That has to sting. Especially since Americans, in choosing Trump, also chose to undo most of Obama’s most precious accomplishments.

On the campaign trail, Trump made no secret of his desire to toss Obama’s climate agenda, his Iran deal and, most importantly, ObamaCare. In recent weeks, he has nominated cabinet officials who are well suited to carrying out those promises. Lofting Scott Pruit, the Oklahoma Attorney General, to the EPA: good-bye overreaching anti-fossil fuel regulations. Rep. Tom Price for HHS: so long ObamaCare. “Mad Dog” Mattis for Defense: the Iran deal is toast. For a president who has put such stock in his “legacy”, and who took office being compared to Abraham Lincoln, the erasure of his eight years must be intolerable.

What will be left of the Obama presidency, which chose to act unilaterally through executive actions and regulations rather than work through Congress? Not much.

Actually, with his embarrassing reluctance to shoulder any responsibility for the drubbing given Democrats over the past eight years, his legacy will begin with a very sour taste in the country’s mouth.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion.....iumph.html
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Presidential

Top intel office not on same page as CIA regarding Russia hack assessment


Published December 13, 2016
· FoxNews.com



The nation’s top intelligence office is not on the same page as the CIA regarding its assessment that Russia interfered in the U.S. elections in a bid to help Donald Trump, a U.S. government source confirmed to Fox News on Tuesday.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the U.S. intelligence community, has not fully embraced the CIA finding.

Fox News is told that several U.S. election-related hacking incidents are being wrongly lumped together, when they should be treated as separate events -- these cover breaches at the Democratic National Committee and another campaign arm; in a top Hillary Clinton campaign official’s email account; and at state election boards.

Reuters reports that while the ODNI does not dispute the CIA’s general analysis on Russia hacking, the office is not convinced of the evidence that Moscow sought specifically to help Trump defeat Democratic opponent Clinton.

The government source told Fox News the discrepancy comes down to Russia’s intent.

One official also told Reuters that the CIA’s judgment was based on the fact that only Democratic information was leaked. The official called this a “thin reed upon which to base an analytical judgment.”

The developments further underscore how U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies may be at odds over an assessment that has fueled Democratic complaints and questions about the race -- and spurred bipartisan calls for deeper congressional investigation.

The Clinton campaign chairman who was hacked, John Podesta, even backed calls for electors -- who are set to formally choose the president next week, based on the results of the Nov. 8 election -- to get an intelligence briefing on Russian interference in the race.

Trump, though, has pushed back hard at the reported assessment, calling it “ridiculous” in an interview with “Fox News Sunday.”

Potential space between the CIA and the ODNI on the matter was first revealed in a letter Monday from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. The letter, obtained by Fox News, noted that the CIA finding conflicts with Clapper’s mid-November public testimony.

"On November 17, 2016, you told the Committee during an open hearing that the IC (Intelligence Community) lacked strong evidence connecting Russian government cyberattacks and WikiLeaks disclosures,” Nunes wrote.

In response to a question at the time from ranking Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, Clapper had said, “As far as the WikiLeaks connection, the evidence there is not as strong and we don't have good insight into the sequencing of the releases or when the data may have been provided. We don't have as good insight into that.”

The Nunes letter continued, “According to new press reports, this is no longer the CIA’s position … I was dismayed that we did not learn earlier, from you directly about the reported conflicting assessments and the CIA’s reported revision of information previously conveyed to this Committee.”

Nunes is requesting a briefing from the CIA and FBI on the current assessment of alleged Russian involvement related to the U.S. election no later than Dec. 16.

The Washington Post first reported Friday that the CIA concluded in a secret assessment that Russia interfered in the race to boost Trump, not just undermine confidence in the system. Intelligence agencies reportedly found individuals connected to the Russian government gave WikiLeaks hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee, as well as from Podesta – though the agencies did not have “specific intelligence” showing Kremlin officials directed the activity.

The Post reported, however, that the FBI also gave a differing account on potential Russian interference.

The Post reported Tuesday that the CIA assessment was based in part on intelligence indicating Moscow’s hacking disproportionately affected Democratic targets.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....sment.html
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4394
Reputation: 245.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is just the first salvo in a battle that is modelled on what they did to George W Bush. In his case, they insisted that he had lost the election well into his second term, and used it to undermine his legitimacy. After 9-11, which Bush had ridden to great popularity, they started ... and in the end, he was being publicly scorned. Death by a thousand cuts.

I think this is the same thing. All big powers try to spy on each other all the time. Merkel got pissed at Obama because she found out he hacking her. Are we to pretend the Germans don't do it, too?

No, they are trying to suggest, without evidence, that Trump did not win the election! The Russians stole it from them.

They are planning to oppose Trump's cabinet choices as well. This is the administration that put Eric Holder into the AG's office so that the President could use the IRS to stop political opponents. It's all about building a narrative that Trump is the personification of evil.

But Trump is a slippery target. He squeezed some of those headlines off the pages by arranging a meeting with Kanye West.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
This is just the first salvo in a battle that is modelled on what they did to George W Bush. In his case, they insisted that he had lost the election well into his second term, and used it to undermine his legitimacy. After 9-11, which Bush had ridden to great popularity, they started ... and in the end, he was being publicly scorned. Death by a thousand cuts.

I think this is the same thing. All big powers try to spy on each other all the time. Merkel got pissed at Obama because she found out he hacking her. Are we to pretend the Germans don't do it, too?

No, they are trying to suggest, without evidence, that Trump did not win the election! The Russians stole it from them.

They are planning to oppose Trump's cabinet choices as well. This is the administration that put Eric Holder into the AG's office so that the President could use the IRS to stop political opponents. It's all about building a narrative that Trump is the personification of evil.

But Trump is a slippery target. He squeezed some of those headlines off the pages by arranging a meeting with Kanye West.


one thing I would like to know I, has there ever been a credible example anywhere in the world where a foreign country "hacked " into anothers election to alter the result ? I've followed politics for years and never heard of something like this happening , especially in a large country .

how would a country like Russia even hack into the US election anyways ? it makes no sense and is pure craziness to even suggest it happened .

even if Russia did hack into the DNC emails , that does not prove they tried to alter the results of the election and according to wikileaks that's not how they got the emails in the first place , they claim it was thru an internal leak
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( I think Obama is losing it , no proof is being shown to indicate how Russia hacked the US election and the report he ordered is still being written up , now he says he's going to take action against Russia ? really what does he plan to do ? )


President Barack Obama says the US will act against Russia over election hacking


December 16, 20161:12pm


President Barack Obama says US will act against Russia. Picture: Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP


US PRESIDENT Barack Obama says the US must and will take action against Russia in response to cyber interference with the election.

Mr Obama told National Public Radio that the US would respond at a “time and place of our choosing”.

“I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing,” he said.

His comments are the clearest indication to date that whatever response the US is planning has not yet occurred.

Mr Obama said some of the response may be explicit and publicised and some of it may not.

He said he’s spoken directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin about his feelings about the hacking.

The Obama administration suggested Thursday that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally authorised the hacking of Democratic officials’ email accounts in the run-up to the presidential election and said it was “fact” that such actions helped Donald Trump’s campaign.

The White House also assailed Trump himself, saying he must have known of Russia’s interference.

No proof was offered for any of the accusations, the latest to unsettle America’s uneasy transition from eight years under Democratic President Barack Obama to a new Republican administration led by Trump.




The claims of Russian meddling in the election also have heightened already debilitating tensions between Washington and Moscow over Syria, Ukraine and a host of other disagreements.

“Only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorised these activities,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said, repeating the words from an October US intelligence assessment.




President Barack Obama shakes hands with Russian President President Vladimir Putin before a bilateral meeting at United Nations headquarters. Picture: Andrew Harnik/AP

President Barack Obama shakes hands with Russian President President Vladimir Putin before a bilateral meeting at United Nations headquarters. Picture: Andrew Harnik/APSource:AP

Obama’s deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, connected the dots further, saying it was Putin who was responsible for the Russian government’s actions.

“I don’t think things happen in the Russian government of this consequence without Vladimir Putin knowing about it,” Rhodes said on MSNBC.

The explosive accusation paints Putin, the leader of perhaps the nation’s greatest geopolitical foe, as having directly undermined US democracy.

US officials have not contended, however, that Trump would have been defeated by Hillary Clinton on November 8 if not for Russia’s assistance. Nor has there has been any indication of tampering with the vote-counting.

The Kremlin flatly rejected the claim of Putin’s involvement, with Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissing it Thursday as “laughable nonsense.”

The dispute over Russia’s role is fuelling an increasingly public spat between Obama’s White House and Trump’s team that is threatening to spoil the delicate truce that Obama and Trump have forged since Election Day.

Although the president and president-elect have avoided criticising each other publicly since Trump’s win, their aides have been more openly antagonistic.

Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s senior transition adviser, said it was “breathtaking” and irresponsible that the White House had suggested Trump knew Russia was interfering to help his campaign.

That led Obama spokesman Josh Earnest on Thursday to unload, arguing that Trump, who has dismissed the CIA’s assessment of Russian interference, should spend less time attacking the intelligence community and more time supporting the investigation that Obama has ordered.

Earnest said it was “obvious” Trump knew what Russia was doing during the campaign, pointing out that Trump had encouraged Moscow during a news conference to find Clinton’s missing emails. Trump has said he was joking.

“I don’t think anybody at the White House thinks it’s funny that an adversary of the United States engaged in malicious cyber activity to destabilise our democracy,” Earnest said. “That’s not a joke.”

US intelligence officials have linked the hacking to Russia’s intelligence agency and its military intelligence division. Moscow has denied all accusations that it orchestrated the hacking of email accounts of Democratic Party officials and Clinton’s campaign chief, John Podesta, and then leaked them to the anti- secrecy website WikiLeaks.




Vladimir Putin (left) speaking with ExxonMobil President and Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson during the signing of a Rosneft-ExxonMobil strategic partnership agreement in Sochi on August 30, 2011. Trump has appointed Tillerson, an oilman with deep ties to Russia, as his secretary of state. Picture: Alexey Druzhinin/AFP

Vladimir Putin (left) speaking with ExxonMobil President and Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson during the signing of a Rosneft-ExxonMobil strategic partnership agreement in Sochi on August 30, 2011. Trump has appointed Tillerson, an oilman with deep ties to Russia, as his secretary of state. Picture: Alexey Druzhinin/AFPSource:AFP

Obama said Thursday that anytime a foreign government tries to interfere in US elections, the nation must take action — “and we will.”

“Some of it may be explicit and publicised, some of it may not be,” Obama told NPR News. “But Mr Putin is well aware of my feelings about this, because I spoke to him directly about it.” Trump and his supporters insist the Democrats’ outrage about Russia is really an attempt to undermine the validity of his election victory.

Rep. Peter King, a Trump ally and New York Republican, called it “disgraceful” as he spoke to reporters amassed in Trump Tower after meeting with the president-elect.

“Right now, certain elements of the media, certain elements of the intelligence community and certain politicians are really doing the work of the Russians,” King said.

Still, Democrats pounced on the latest suggestions of Putin being connected to the daily drip of emails during the presidential race from some of Clinton’s closest advisers.

Putin was “clearly involved,” said outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

“Having been the former head of the KGB, does that surprise you?” Reid said. “And does it surprise anybody today when he denied it?”

Reid’s comments echoed those of Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, who said Wednesday it’s hard to think that Putin didn’t know about the operation. She called suggestions that he was aware of the hacking “very credible.” There has been no specific, persuasive evidence shared publicly about the extent of Putin’s role or knowledge of the hackings.

That lack of proof undercuts Democrats’ strategy to portray Putin’s involvement as irrefutable evidence of a directed Russian government plot to undermine America’s democratic system. Secretary of State John Kerry defended Obama’s handling of the issue during the heat of the presidential campaign — a stance now criticised by some Democrats as too weak — but said he wouldn’t comment on whether Putin was involved.

“People need to remember that the president issued a warning,” Kerry said. “But he had to be obviously sensitive to not being viewed as interfering on behalf of a candidate or against a candidate or in a way that promoted unrealistic assessments about what was happening.”

http://www.news.com.au/technol.....ddd35d3f7c
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Russian hackers tried, failed to breach Republican National Committee, officials say


Published December 15, 2016
· The Wall Street Journal



Russian hackers tried to penetrate the computer networks of the Republican National Committee, using the same techniques that allowed them to infiltrate its Democratic counterpart, according to U.S. officials who have been briefed on the attempted intrusion.

But the intruders failed to get past security defenses on the RNC’s computer networks, the officials said. And people close to the investigation said it indicated a less aggressive and much less persistent effort by Russian intelligence to hack the Republican group than the Democratic National Committee. Only a single email account linked to a long-departed RNC staffer was targeted.

The disclosures came as a political furor grows over suspected Russian hacking of U.S. political organizations. The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that Russian hackers, whom analysts say work for that country’s military and intelligence apparatus, stole emails from the DNC, as well as another Democratic organization and the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, to harm her candidacy and boost Republican Donald Trump’s chances of winning. Russia has denied the allegations.

The possibility that Russians tried and failed to infiltrate the RNC doesn’t necessarily conflict with the CIA’s conclusion. A senior U.S. official said analysts now believe what started as an information-gathering campaign aimed at both parties later took on a focus of leaked emails about Mrs. Clinton and Democrats.

Mr. Trump has discounted the U.S. intelligence assessments and disparaged intelligence officials. In a Twitter message Thursday, he wrote: “If Russia, or some other entity, was hacking, why did the White House wait so long to act? Why did they only complain after Hillary lost?”

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....s-say.html
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wikileaks founder Assange on hacked Podesta, DNC emails: 'Our source is not the Russian government'


Published December 16, 2016
· FoxNews.com

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange denied Thursday that hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta were stolen and passed to his organization by Russian state actors.

"Our source is not the Russian government," Assange told "The Sean Hannity Show."

"So in other words, let me be clear," Hannity asked, "Russia did not give you the Podesta documents or anything from the DNC?"

"That's correct," Assange responded.

Assange's assertion contradicts the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which concluded in October that "the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails [sic] from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations."

In addition to the hacked emails from the DNC and Podesta, Assange admitted that Wikileaks received "received about three pages of information to do with the [Republican National Committee] and Trump [during the campaign], but it was already public somewhere else."

Late Thursday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Russian hackers had tried and failed to access the RNC using the same methods as the DNC hackers.

Assange had previously denied that the DNC and Podesta emails had came from any government. He has steadfastly refused to identify the source of the messages.

"We’re unhappy that we felt that we needed to even say that it wasn’t a state party. Normally, we say nothing at all," Assange told Hannity. "We have ... a strong interest in protecting our sources, and so we never say anything about them, never ruling anyone in or anyone out.

"And so here, in order to prevent a distraction attack against our publications, we’ve had to come out and say ‘no, it’s not a state party. Stop trying to distract in that way and pay attention to the content of the publication.’"

Assange added that the U.S. government, corporations and even private citizens are vulnerable to a cyberattack like the one on the DNC and Podesta.

"Everything is almost completely insecure now," he said. "Computer systems have become so complex that it is not possible to understand all the parts, let alone secure them. It’s just impossible."

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....nment.html
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7528
Reputation: 301.2Reputation: 301.2
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2016 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RCO wrote:
Wikileaks founder Assange on hacked Podesta, DNC emails: 'Our source is not the Russian government'

Published December 16, 2016
· FoxNews.com

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange denied Thursday that hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta were stolen and passed to his organization by Russian state actors.

"Our source is not the Russian government," Assange told "The Sean Hannity Show."

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....nment.html


How long till we find out it was a DNC staffer?

Quote:

"And so here, in order to prevent a distraction attack against our publications, we’ve had to come out and say ‘no, it’s not a state party. Stop trying to distract in that way and pay attention to the content of the publication.’"


Many tend to not pay attention to the fact that these things were actually said;
If you don't want to be embarrassed by your emails, use decorum when you write them.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2016 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cosmostein wrote:
RCO wrote:
Wikileaks founder Assange on hacked Podesta, DNC emails: 'Our source is not the Russian government'

Published December 16, 2016
· FoxNews.com

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange denied Thursday that hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta were stolen and passed to his organization by Russian state actors.

"Our source is not the Russian government," Assange told "The Sean Hannity Show."

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....nment.html


How long till we find out it was a DNC staffer?

Quote:

"And so here, in order to prevent a distraction attack against our publications, we’ve had to come out and say ‘no, it’s not a state party. Stop trying to distract in that way and pay attention to the content of the publication.’"


Many tend to not pay attention to the fact that these things were actually said;
If you don't want to be embarrassed by your emails, use decorum when you write them.



I'm confused by the whole situation and highly doubt the CIA has proof that Putin ordered the hacking or was even involved , unless they've hacked into Russian emails ?

it all seems rather bizarre and appears to be about upsetting trump's start and making sure he's off to a bad start and tainted in some peoples minds , this crazy idea that Russia helped put him in the white house , its not like they donated money and ran TV ads or anything , they weren't involved with his campaign and the wikileaks story was a very small % of the press that campaign ,
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4394
Reputation: 245.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RCO wrote:
Bugs wrote:
This is just the first salvo in a battle that is modelled on what they did to George W Bush. In his case, they insisted that he had lost the election well into his second term, and used it to undermine his legitimacy. After 9-11, which Bush had ridden to great popularity, they started ... and in the end, he was being publicly scorned. Death by a thousand cuts.

I think this is the same thing. All big powers try to spy on each other all the time. Merkel got pissed at Obama because she found out he hacking her. Are we to pretend the Germans don't do it, too?

No, they are trying to suggest, without evidence, that Trump did not win the election! The Russians stole it from them.

They are planning to oppose Trump's cabinet choices as well. This is the administration that put Eric Holder into the AG's office so that the President could use the IRS to stop political opponents. It's all about building a narrative that Trump is the personification of evil.

But Trump is a slippery target. He squeezed some of those headlines off the pages by arranging a meeting with Kanye West.


one thing I would like to know I, has there ever been a credible example anywhere in the world where a foreign country "hacked " into anothers election to alter the result ? I've followed politics for years and never heard of something like this happening , especially in a large country .

how would a country like Russia even hack into the US election anyways ? it makes no sense and is pure craziness to even suggest it happened .

even if Russia did hack into the DNC emails , that does not prove they tried to alter the results of the election and according to wikileaks that's not how they got the emails in the first place , they claim it was thru an internal leak


First of all, there is no reason to believe that Wikileaks got the emails from a 'hack' in the sense that a foreign power got them and released them. In fact, we do not know that the emails came from a surreptitious computer 'break and enter' at all. They could have been more prosaic 'leaks'.

Some people close to the intelligence community in Washington think it may have been a security agency employee, pissed off at the cavalier way Hillary was handling security. Lives could have been lost, we don't know. Second, it is possible that people in the campaign released them to Wikileaks. Hillary stole the nomination from Bernie, and this could be a motive. (At least many Democrats believe that.)

All we really know is that Wikileaks released them during the election campaign in an obvious effort to make her ascension to the Presidency more difficult. And this may have been a decision affected by Assange's avid desire to go back to his ordinary life after six years of being incarcerated in the Ecuadorian embassy.

And we know one other thing. Nobody has plausibly claimed they aren't authentic. Not even Donna Brazile, a skilled liar, who only implies that nobody knows if they are real or not. (I am not referring to Pizzagate here.) The whole 'fake news' meme now appearing in the press is simply a Democrat counter-salvo, after the fact. (Much of the campaign against Trump was fake -- such as the claim he had been a mental patient, made by Newsweek, or that he's Putin's candidate. At best, speculation.)

This is a true change of regimes. Trump is coming into office with essentially no political debts. He has more freedom of action than any President, going back to FDR. He is mobilizing a lot of talent for his cabinet, and initial indications are that he's preparing to take the US ship of state into a 180 degree turn. If he makes sound decisions on the Supreme Court, and patches things up with Putin, he will have done a lot. But I think he means to do more than that.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2016 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obama orders sanctions against Russia, expels operatives, in response to hacking


Published December 29, 2016
· FoxNews.com



The Obama administration announced sanctions Thursday against Russia’s intelligence services, while ejecting dozens of intelligence operatives from the U.S., as part of a response to what it says are efforts by Moscow to influence the 2016 election.

Using an executive order, Obama sanctioned the GRU and the FSB -- two of Russia's intelligence services as well as other entities and individuals associated with the GRU. The cybersecurity firm hired by the Democratic National Committee to investigate the hack of its emails earlier this year the hacking came from the Fancy Bear group, believed to be affiliated with the GRU, Russia's military intelligence agency.

In addition to the sanctions, the State Department has declared 35 Russian intelligence operatives "persona non grata" in the U.S., and is shutting down two Russian compounds in Maryland and New York.

Russian President Vladimir Putin's spokesman said in response to the announcement that Moscow will consider retaliatory measures in response.

"We think that such steps by a U.S. administration that has three weeks left to work are aimed at two things: to further harm Russian-American ties, which are at a low point as it is, as well as, obviously, to deal a blow to the foreign policy plans of the incoming administration of the president-elect," Dmitry Peskov told reporters in Moscow.

The Treasury Secretary meanwhile has named two individuals it says were involved in "using cyber-enabled means to cause misappropriation of funds and personal identifying information."

"These actions follow repeated private and public warnings that we have issued to the Russian government, and are a necessary and appropriate response to efforts to harm U.S. interests in violation of established international norms of behavior," Obama said in a statement.

Obama also announced that the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI will release declassified information on Russian cyberactivity to help "identify, detect and Russia's global campaign of malicious cyber activities."

Obama also said that the administration will be providing a report to Congress "in the coming days" about Russian attempts to interfere in the election, as well as previous election cycles.

The president also hinted that his administration to do more to hold Russia accountable.

"These actions are not the sum total of our response to Russia's aggressive activities," Obama said. "We will continue to take a variety of actions at a time and place of our choosing, some of which will not be publicized."

U.S. intelligence services have concluded that the Russians interfered in the election to try and help President-elect Donald Trump win. Trump has dismissed the conclusions.

However, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis. welcomed the move in a statement.

"Russia does not share America's interests. In fact, it has consistently sought to undermine them, sowing dangerous instability around the world. While today's action by the administration is overdue, it is an appropriate way to end eight years of failed policy with Russia," Ryan said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....cking.html
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ELECTIONS

US gives detailed look at Russia's alleged election hacking


Published December 30, 2016
· Associated Press



The U.S. has released its most detailed report yet on accusations that Russia interfered in the U.S. presidential election by hacking American political sites and email accounts.

The 13-page joint analysis by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI is the first such report ever to attribute malicious cyber activity to a particular country or actors.

It was also the first time the U.S. has officially and specifically tied intrusions into the Democratic National Committee to hackers with the Russian civilian and military intelligence services, the FSB and GRU, expanding on an Oct. 7 accusation by the Obama administration.

The report said the intelligence services were involved in "an ongoing campaign of cyber-enabled operations directed at the U.S. government and its citizens." It added, "In some cases, (the Russian intelligence services') actors masqueraded as third parties, hiding behind false online personas designed to cause the victim to misattribute the source of the attack."

Over the summer stolen emails from Democrats were posted by an online persona known as Guccifer 2.0, believed by U.S. officials to be linked to Russia. Outrage over documents that appeared to show favoritism for Hillary Clinton forced the DNC's chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, to resign.

The U.S. released the technical report Thursday as President Barack Obama sanctioned the GRU and the FSB, the GRU's leadership and companies which the U.S. said support the GRU.

The sanctions were the administration's first use of a 2015 executive order for combatting cyberattacks against critical infrastructure and commercial espionage. Because election systems aren't considered critical infrastructure, Obama amended the order Thursday to allow for sanctions on entities "interfering with or undermining election processes or institutions."

The retaliation against Russia, just weeks before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, culminated months of political handwringing about how and whether to respond to Moscow's alleged meddling. U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russia's goal was to help Trump win -- an assessment Trump has dismissed as ridiculous. Trump said Thursday the U.S. should move on, but that he would meet with the intelligence community's leaders next week for an update on the situation.

The report did not go far beyond confirming details already disclosed by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which was hired to investigate the DNC hacks.

It described the intelligence services' use of "spearphishing" -- fake emails intended to trick victims into typing in their user names and passwords. At least one person opened attachments with malicious software. The report noted that actors "likely associated" with Russian intelligence services are continuing to engage in spearphishing campaigns, including one launched just days after the U.S. election.

The DNC was infiltrated by the FSB in summer 2015 and again by the GRU in spring 2016 using spearphishing emails that often appeared to come from legitimate or official organizations, the report said.

Russian officials have denied any involvement in hacking U.S. political sites and emails.

The report provided clues, or pieces of code left behind by hackers, cybersecurity workers in the private sector could look for to identify compromised systems and prevent more intrusions. The Department of Homeland Security said it has already included this information within its own cyber threat information-sharing program, which automatically flags threats in real time for participating companies and agencies.

Releasing such a report was a political twist on the administration's strategy of "name and shame," in place since 2012 and used to bring indictments against Chinese military hackers for economic espionage and Iranian hackers for an attack on banks and a small dam in New York. It was also a far more detailed and sophisticated telling of Russia's hacking, with technical indicators of compromise, compared to the spare technical details released after the Obama administration publicly blamed North Korea for a cyberattack against Sony Pictures Entertainment.

U.S. officials also provided antivirus vendors with two malicious software samples used by Russian intelligence services.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic.....cking.html
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 6758
Reputation: 240.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Jan 03, 2017 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

( wikileaks is saying once again that its source was not the Russian government or anyone associated with them )


Assange To Hannity: Source For WikiLeaks Was Not Russian Government


10.8k Shares

Posted By Ian Schwartz
On Date January 2, 2017


Assange To Hannity: Source For WikiLeaks Was Not Russian Government



In an exclusive interview with FOX News Channel's Sean Hannity the founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange said Russia was not the source for the DNC and John Podesta hacks.



HANNITY: Can you say to the American people, unequivocally, that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta's emails, can you tell the American people 1,000 percent that you did not get it from Russia or anybody associated with Russia?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yes. We can say, we have said, repeatedly that over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party.


Hannity's full interview with Assange will air Tuesday night at 10pm ET. More from the interview:


ASSANGE: Our publications had wide uptake by the American people, they're all true. But that's not the allegation that’s being presented by the Obama White House. So, why such a dramatic response? Well, the reason is obvious. They’re trying to delegitimize the Trump administration as it goes into the White House. They are trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate President...

ASSANGE: Our source is not a state party, so the answer for our interactions is no. But if we look at our most recent statement from the US government, which is on the 29th of December, OK, we had five different branches of government, Treasury, DHS, FBI, White House presenting their accusations to underpin Obama’s throwing out 29 Russian diplomats. What was missing from all of those statements? The word WikiLeaks. It’s very strange.

http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....nment.html
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Obama orders review of possible hacking during election

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB