Fake News: ‘Russia Intervened to Help Trump Win Election: Intelligence Officials’

December 10th, 2016

Update: Top U.S. Spy Agency: No Evidence Russia Involved

Via: Reuters:

The overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment that Russian cyber attacks were aimed at helping Republican President-elect Donald Trump win the 2016 election, three American officials said on Monday.

While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA’s analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.

The position of the ODNI, which oversees the 17 agency-strong U.S. intelligence community, could give Trump fresh ammunition to dispute the CIA assessment, which he rejected as “ridiculous” in weekend remarks, and press his assertion that no evidence implicates Russia in the cyber attacks.

Trump’s rejection of the CIA’s judgment marks the latest in a string of disputes over Russia’s international conduct that have erupted between the president-elect and the intelligence community he will soon command.

An ODNI spokesman declined to comment on the issue.

“ODNI is not arguing that the agency (CIA) is wrong, only that they can’t prove intent,” said one of the three U.S. officials. “Of course they can’t, absent agents in on the decision-making in Moscow.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, whose evidentiary standards require it to make cases that can stand up in court, declined to accept the CIA’s analysis – a deductive assessment of the available intelligence – for the same reason, the three officials said.

Open thread, if you can be bothered.

My guess is that there are warring Deep State factions, and Clinton’s puppet masters lost. It might be that the side that didn’t want nuclear war with Russia backed Trump, and maybe they stole the “election,” but I don’t know.

No U.S. national election result is valid.

What I do know is that The Onion is a more credible source than the Washington Post at this point.

Via: Reuters:

U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help President-elect Donald Trump win the White House, and not just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, a senior U.S. official said on Friday.

U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that as the 2016 presidential campaign progressed, Russian government officials devoted increasing attention to assisting Trump’s effort to win the election, the U.S. official familiar with the finding told Reuters on Friday night, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The president-elect’s transition office released a statement that exaggerated his margin of victory and attacked the U.S. intelligence community that Trump will soon command, but did not address the analysts’ conclusion.

“These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction,” the statement said. “The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again.'”

Democrats and some Republicans in Congress are calling for a full investigation into Russia’s election year activities.

“Protecting the integrity of our elections is hindered when President-elect Trump and his transition team minimize or dismiss the intelligence assessments themselves,” Representative Adam Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said in a statement issued on Saturday.

Citing U.S. officials briefed on the matter, the Washington Post reported on Friday that intelligence agencies had identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, to WikiLeaks.

10 Responses to “Fake News: ‘Russia Intervened to Help Trump Win Election: Intelligence Officials’”

  1. RobertS says:

    WaPo sure has decided to reveal themselves lately. I loved their list of deplorable web sites and was greatly relieved to see a lot of my favorite sites were on it. I guess they figured we were stupider than we are.

    I commend you for having the foresight and the ability to get out of this horror show. The time to exit is fast approaching.

  2. Duros says:

    When in doubt, blame the Ruskies. The McCarthy era boogyman tactic doesn’t work as it used to, Putin seems to have learned from past leaders, Russia isn’t nearly as overtly aggressive as it used to be (cuban missle crisis etc.) The US is by far the aggressor now, Obama seems to be doing everything he can to provoke Russia.

    I think there has been somewhat of a shakeup in the public aspect of the factions. The new boss is probably same as the old, (Goldman Sachs inc.) but the media flamethrower against trump hasn’t stopped, even after the election. The Madame President issue of Newsweek was interesting, the factions controlling Hollywood/the Media seem pissed.

    I still have to hold the grain of salt that this was all thought out in a think tank/AI years ago, and they’re just playing us to see how we react, but this election cycle seems unique to me. I’ve never seen a candidate treated like Trump was on this one. Imagine if they pulled the skeletons out of the closet on Bush, or Bill Clinton (especially during the election)?

    Newt Gingrich, for what his word is worth), did say at one point on Fox that Trump hadn’t been through the rituals, he wasn’t part of the club. The pictures with Trump and the Clintons are interesting, and his cabinet is terrifying, with the exception the EPA pick so far. Time will tell, Shrillery was indigestable.

  3. cryingfreeman says:

    I think the Deep State has to have factions and perhaps power struggles, but is there a supreme power base at the head of it all? And if so, why would it prefer Trump to Hillary?

    I still think my wacky theory that the Deep State has long intended to use Trump as war president might just be right. Why? Because the Deep State’s longstanding agenda has been the encirclement and provocation with Russia, and that has not changed since Trump won the election. And for reasons outlined previously, Trump would make a far better war president than Hillary.

    Having said that, the actual identity of the president is immaterial to the Deep State’s foreign policy, meaning the president’s power is limited and his role is that of visible figurehead. He takes his marching orders from the Deep State. So, if Obama right up to the election and afterwards has continued to preside over confrontation with Russia, that means Trump will preside over the same (assuming all this theorising is sound).

    Now watch to see if Trump fills his cabinet with aggressive, hawkish neocons.

  4. Calm says:

    I don’t see it as a future war with Russia.

    But rather a future war with China.

    All this anti-Russia talk and sanctions is all about keeping them in place until Putin dies or leaves the leadership. It is impossible to attack Russia without taking on China. China will not stand by and watch it’s major energy partner be destroyed.

    Following Putin’s retirement, the U.S. will then offer to lift all sanctions and bogeyman tactics against Russia and offer “Everything” including membership in NATO, European Union and whatever it takes to wean Russia away from China.

    In the meantime, (within 5 years) the U.S. and all NATO members (including Israel) will walk away from the United Nations. Nato members will be the world’s policeman.

    Domestically, within the Unites States, most all social programs will be cut by 30% and Trump will introduce military troops onto American streets proclaiming “Law and Order”.

    Calm

  5. rotger says:

    There is a possibility that the anti Russian histeria is all about making sure Trump doesn’t get to close to them in the future. If he does, the media will say: “See! we told you he is in bed with Putin!”.

  6. Dennis says:

    Hm…The Reuters article itself seemed Onion-esque to me!

  7. NH says:

    There’s an article that came out by Seymour Hersh back in January in the London Review of Books, titled “Military to Military”, which details some of the dynamics between the Neocon/CIA faction and a large portion of the senior military/intelligence officials. U.S. Media did not publish it. Reading the article requires a fee, but at the bottom of this other linked article, there is a long excerpt:

    http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=143961

    Small portion of the excerpt:

    “The military’s resistance dates back to the summer of 2013, when a highly classified assessment, put together by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then led by General Martin Dempsey, forecast that the fall of the Assad regime would lead to chaos and, potentially, to Syria’s takeover by jihadi extremists, much as was then happening in Libya. A former senior adviser to the Joint Chiefs told me that the document was an ‘all-source’ appraisal, drawing on information from signals, satellite and human intelligence, and took a dim view of the Obama administration’s insistence on continuing to finance and arm the so-called moderate rebel groups. By then, the CIA had been conspiring for more than a year with allies in the UK, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to ship guns and goods – to be used for the overthrow of Assad – from Libya, via Turkey, into Syria. … The [intelligence] assessment was bleak: there was no viable ‘moderate’ opposition to Assad, and the US was arming extremists.
    Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the DIA between 2012 and 2014, confirmed that his agency had sent a constant stream of classified warnings to the civilian leadership about the dire consequences of toppling Assad. The jihadists, he said, were in control of the opposition. … ‘If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic,’ Flynn told me. … [A former JCS adviser told Hersh] ‘It was clear that Assad needed better tactical intelligence and operational advice. The JCS concluded that if those needs were met, the overall fight against Islamist terrorism would be enhanced. Obama didn’t know.’ …
    The Joint Chiefs of Staff were operating behind the President’s back, because they knew that he favored the jihadists against Assad and so would prevent what they were doing. The U.S. President was opaque even to his top advisors, but Obama’s obsession to conquer Russia had by then become clear to them.”

  8. Duros says:

    The Onion is now a more credible source than the Washington Post. I think cracking down on fake/propaganda news is a great idea, all they need to do is shut down the all major news outlets.

    “The Washington Post, in a front-page splash on Friday, fingered the CIA for allegedly confirming the wild rumors of Russian hacking that were concocted and spread by Democratic lawmakers for months preceding the election and the weeks since the GOP win. The Washington Post’s story, however, contained no CIA sources and in fact, no credible U.S. intelligence agency sources whatsoever. Instead, it hinged on what unnamed lawmakers had supposedly been told by unidentified, supposed CIA-linked sources in “secret” briefings: That the CIA had developed proof the Russian state waged an orchestrated campaign to destabilize the U.S. election to benefit GOP-candidate Trump.

    “It’s an outright lie,” a CIA analyst divulged to True Pundit. “There’s nothing definitive like that. There are leads from activity originating in Finland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Britain, France, China and Russia.”

    Multiple CIA sources are now denouncing the Washington Post for knowingly reporting misleading national security intelligence. Intelligence insiders said no one in the Agency or in the FBI, who is running at least one parallel inquiry, has ruled out a possible internal leak within the Democratic National Committee from actor(s) inside the United States who funneled private DNC emails to WikiLeaks.

    http://truepundit.com/cia-washington-post-report-linking-russian-government-to-trump-election-hacking-is-outright-lie/

  9. dale says:

    Not a bother. Appreciate the existing comments. But I don’t have anything substantially different to add than the two sentences you first laid down – particularly the last three words; I don’t know.

    And it’s not from lack of trying, reading, looking for clues. I feel I’m watching a circus, a stage play, a movie that I not only can’t figure out but that is also causing myriad side effects on the audience (the world). It’s a casa de loco, so many locked doors, this house of mirrors ain’t funny no more.

  10. brandon says:

    This is so confusing. I so bad want to believe that Trump broke through their system. I also am aware “they’re” way smarter than us and this is indeed part of the “plan”

    Could just be the divide and conquer scenario. It appears they’re pushing towards civil unrest and Trump seem like the perfect candidate to open up “camps”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.