Discussion:
A red line that should not be crossed
Add Reply
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-25 23:21:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times

By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner

May 24, 2018

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.

The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.

But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.

The president’s legal team was unapologetic. “We are certainly entitled
to know” what information the government has on the F.B.I. informant,
Rudolph W. Giuliani, another lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the
investigation, said in an interview. The meeting “cuts off a long
subpoena,” he said, referring to a legal fight for the information.

At least two lawmakers participating in the briefings told Mr. Flood to
his face that his presence was inappropriate.

“Although he did not participate in the meetings which followed, as the
White House’s attorney handling the special counsel’s investigation, his
involvement — in any capacity — was entirely improper,” Representative
Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said in a statement.

House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.

But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign. He demanded in recent days
that the Justice Department investigate the matter and turn over records
to Congress, despite warnings from law enforcement officials in his
administration that sharing the documents would put the informant and
foreign intelligence partners at risk.

Law enforcement and intelligence officials did not provide documents to
the lawmakers on Thursday, but they did provide information about the
use of the informant, according to two people familiar with the matter.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified meeting.

Republicans close to Mr. Nunes made clear in the run-up to the meetings
that they would not be satisfied unless officials turned over documents.
Neither Mr. Nunes nor lawmakers close to him spoke publicly after
Thursday’s sessions.

Democrats who attended said after the meetings that the F.B.I. had done
nothing wrong by employing the informant, an American academic who
served in several Republican administrations and has taught more
recently in Britain.

“Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence
to support any allegation that the F.B.I. or any intelligence agency
placed a ‘spy’ in the Trump campaign, or otherwise failed to follow
appropriate procedures and protocols,” Mr. Schiff told reporters on
behalf of the Democrats in the briefing. He did not take questions.

White House officials had at first arranged for only Mr. Nunes to be
briefed. But Republican Senate leaders, including Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky, the majority leader, and Richard M. Burr of North Carolina,
the Intelligence Committee chairman, pressed the White House to change
the audience to the so-called Gang of Eight, the select bipartisan group
with whom the government’s most sensitive intelligence is shared.

Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Thursday that the Gang of Eight
meeting was an “appropriate way to convey whatever information the
administration had to convey,” but he declined to critique Mr. Trump’s
charges of illegal spying.

As Mr. Trump continued to fan unsubstantiated claims that partisan
Democrats had planted a spy in his campaign, the logistics for the
meetings shifted several times.

Ultimately, Mr. Schiff was allowed to attend a morning session that had
previously been offered to just Mr. Nunes, Speaker Paul D. Ryan of
Wisconsin and another Republican congressman. The Gang of Eight met
later Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill.

Mr. Flood’s presence at the meetings was entirely unexpected. While Mr.
Kelly helped arrange the meetings at Mr. Trump’s request, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said no White House staff
members would attend. Guidance circulated by the Justice Department late
Wednesday did not include Mr. Flood among the invitees.

“For the record, the President’s Chief of Staff and his attorney in an
ongoing criminal investigation into the President’s campaign have no
business showing up to a classified intelligence briefing,” Senator Mark
Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said
on Twitter.

When Democrats confronted Mr. Flood in the Gang of Eight meeting, Mr.
Kelly intervened and dismissed their criticism, according to one of the
officials familiar with the meeting.

Democrats tried to start their own inquiry. Representative Jerrold
Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, made a formal request for the Justice Department to
investigate the disclosure of the confidential informant’s name and
existence to the news media.
Image
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the
Intelligence Committee chairman, has been quiet about what exactly he
hopes to learn about the informant.CreditLeah Millis/Reuters

While there is no constitutional provision that says the president’s
personal lawyer cannot make a statement at a classified briefing, legal
scholars expressed misgivings.

“Even if Flood wasn’t there for any operative parts of the meeting, the
optics are disquieting,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the
University of Texas School of Law. “Rather than being sensitive to the
clear potential conflict this creates, the president is driving a truck
through the middle of it. Historically, a president would be very
careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict, as opposed to relishing
in it.”

Mr. Ryan, who has been criticized for not reining in House Republican
attacks on the Russia inquiry and federal law enforcement, defended the
unusual meetings.

Inherent in the Intelligence Committee’s work “is the responsibility to
ask tough questions of the executive branch,” he said in a statement.
“That is why we have insisted and will continue to insist on Congress’s
constitutional right to information necessary for the conduct of oversight.”

Mr. Nunes, a loyal ally of Mr. Trump who advised his presidential
transition, has been quiet about what exactly he hoped to learn about
the informant, saying only that his late-April request was part of an
oversight investigation into potential political bias and abuse of power
within the Justice Department as it relates to the Russia investigation.

It was the latest in a series of bold demands for classified documents
and testimony related to the Russia inquiry — and far from his first
open confrontation with top Republican officials in the department. And
it echoed another episode, from last spring, in which Mr. Trump falsely
claimed that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, and Mr.
Nunes went public with information that he said showed the Obama
administration had “incidentally” collected intelligence on Trump
associates.

Democrats say that the latest episode — including the president’s
involvement — is the most recent gambit by Mr. Nunes and Mr. Trump to
undermine the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gain
information about his inquiry.

Many of Mr. Nunes’s targets were in the room for the meeting:
Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy
attorney general; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence,
along with other law enforcement and intelligence officials.

Mr. Trump continued to rail against law enforcement on Twitter on
Thursday, repeating his unsubstantiated claims. “Large dollars were paid
to the Spy, far beyond normal,” he said, without citing evidence, before
referring to the matter as “one of the biggest political scandals in
U.S. history.”

Five former top American intelligence officials who have worked for
Democratic and Republican administrations, including Leon E. Panetta and
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, warned on Wednesday that House Republicans were
putting at risk the tradition of bipartisan oversight of intelligence.

“When congressional oversight is overly partisan — or focused on
undermining important counterintelligence investigations — we worry
about inappropriate political influence on the investigators and the
erosion of a bipartisan approach to intelligence and national security,”
they wrote in an open letter.

Reporting was contributed by Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman from
New York, and Adam Goldman, Thomas Kaplan and Charlie Savage from
Washington.

Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the
Morning Briefing newsletter.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New
York edition with the headline: Trump Proxies Drop by Briefings on
Russia Case. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Related Coverage

F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to
Spy, as Trump Claims
May 18, 2018
Image

Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
May 16, 2018
Image

Trump Repeats Unconfirmed Claims of Campaign Spying
May 23, 2018
Image
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
news

Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.

When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
John McAdams
2018-05-25 23:32:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
Note the TIMES liberal spin.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
That's what they said, eh?

And Tony, who usually will not believe anything from the FBI, believes
it.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign.
Note the TIMES spin.

The FBI did recruit a fellow to spy *on* the Trump campaign.
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-obama-spy-on-trump/

No, it's the public's right to know that the fellow was Stefan Halper.

Tony would normally be very happy with the "outing" of somebody who
spied on an American political campaign, *if* a liberal candidate was
spied on.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
You mean the FBI can no longer use Halper to spy on political
campaigns of which they disapprove?

For Tony, "the enemy" is the Trump people, and Republicans in
Congress.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?

Really, Tony.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-26 23:29:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Trump???s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.???s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON ??? President Trump???s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.???s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks ???to
relay the president???s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law??? and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president???s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
Note the TIMES liberal spin.
Wow, how did you figure out it was the New York Times? Aren't they
always liberal?

Liberals don't believe in dictators.
Post by John McAdams
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee???s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant ??? a common F.B.I. tool ???
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump???s campaign.
That's what they said, eh?
And Tony, who usually will not believe anything from the FBI, believes
it.
I often believe the FBI. Case by case basis.
I don't believe Hoover when he said a bullet fell out out of JFK's head
when they unwrapped the body.
What is the IT that I believe? I can't believe everything.
But I know the difference between an agent and an informant.
Post by John McAdams
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign.
Note the TIMES spin.
So you say that Trump never said that?

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Trump+fbi+spy&&view=detail&mid=C490A17B74BE2707BB05C490A17B74BE2707BB05&&FORM=VRDGAR


Don't you believe Trump? What are you, some kind of Commie?
Post by John McAdams
The FBI did recruit a fellow to spy *on* the Trump campaign.
Nope.
Post by John McAdams
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-obama-spy-on-trump/
No, it's the public's right to know that the fellow was Stefan Halper.
No, it is not. Didn't you just finish reading my messages about outing
the identities of spies?
It's called TREASON.
Post by John McAdams
Tony would normally be very happy with the "outing" of somebody who
spied on an American political campaign, *if* a liberal candidate was
spied on.
Depends on many factors. I have no problem with outing Benedict Arnold.
That is not going to affect the future unless you have a time Machine.
Are you the 11th Master? [Doctor Who joke]

Liberals have been spied on as well. Doesn't make it right.
Remember McCartyism?
Post by John McAdams
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
You mean the FBI can no longer use Halper to spy on political
campaigns of which they disapprove?
Well, I doubt they would get much. Remember all the guys who pleaded
guilty already? They are wired and being used to spy on those who did
not plead guilty. Has Trump been charged yet or did you travel ahead and
know the charges?
Post by John McAdams
For Tony, "the enemy" is the Trump people, and Republicans in
Congress.
Not just the Congress. ALL Republicans.
The goobers are not enemies. I just feel sorry for the way they were
duped, like Trump University.
Post by John McAdams
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Nope.
I rhink some Russians will be and have been.
Post by John McAdams
Really, Tony.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
XXX
2018-05-26 23:56:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
Note the TIMES liberal spin.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
That's what they said, eh?
And Tony, who usually will not believe anything from the FBI, believes
it.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign.
Note the TIMES spin.
The FBI did recruit a fellow to spy *on* the Trump campaign.
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-obama-spy-on-trump/
No, it's the public's right to know that the fellow was Stefan Halper.
Tony would normally be very happy with the "outing" of somebody who
spied on an American political campaign, *if* a liberal candidate was
spied on.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
You mean the FBI can no longer use Halper to spy on political
campaigns of which they disapprove?
For Tony, "the enemy" is the Trump people, and Republicans in
Congress.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
stop the fox echo chamber bs
John McAdams
2018-05-26 23:57:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
XXX
2018-05-28 00:07:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
That "Russian authorities" had cultivated Trump "for at least 5 years",
and that the operation was "supported and directed" by Putin.[39][83]
(Dossier, p. 1)
That Putin aimed to spread "discord and disunity" within the United
States and between Western allies, whom he saw as a threat to Russia's
interests.[41][84] (Dossier, pp. 1–2)
That Trump was a "divisive" and "anti-Establishment" candidate, as well
as "a pragmatist with whom they could do business". That Trump would
remain a divisive force even if not elected.[85][86] (Dossier, p. 29)
That a major goal of the Russians in supporting Trump was "to upset the
liberal international status quo, including on Ukraine-related
sanctions, which was seriously disadvantaging the country.[85][86]
(Dossier, pp. 28–29)
That the Russian government's support for Trump was originally conducted
by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, then by the Federal Security Service
(FSB), and was eventually directly handled by the Russian presidency
because of its "growing significance over time."[85][3] (Dossier, p. 29)
That Trump had "so far declined various sweetener real estate business
deals", but had "accepted a regular flow of intelligence from the
Kremlin," notably on his political rivals.[21][87] (Dossier, p. 1)
That there was "a well-developed conspiracy of co-operation between [the
Trump campaign] and the Russian leadership," with information willingly
exchanged in both directions. That this co-operation was "sanctioned at
highest levels and involving Russian diplomatic staff based in the US."
That the Trump campaign used "moles within DNC and hackers in the US as
well as outside in Russia."[88][89] (Dossier, p. 7)
That Trump associates had established "an intelligence exchange [with
the Kremlin] for at least 8 years." That Trump and his team had
delivered "intelligence on the activities, business and otherwise, in
the US of leading Russian oligarchs and their families", as requested by
Putin."[85][90][86] (Dossier, p. 11)
That the Trump camp became angry and resentful toward Putin when they
realized he was not only aiming to weaken Clinton and bolster Trump, but
was attempting to "undermine the US government and democratic system
more generally."[86] (Dossier, p. 17)
Key roles of Manafort, Cohen, and Page
That then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had "managed" the
"conspiracy of co-operation", and that he used Trump's foreign policy
adviser, Carter Page, and others, "as intermediaries".[91][92] (Dossier,
p. 7)
That Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of leaking the stolen
DNC emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 Democratic National
Convention.[93][84] (Dossier, pp. 7, 17)
That Cohen played a "key role" in the Trump–Russia relationship[3] by
maintaining a "covert relationship with Russia",[94][95][96] arranging
cover-ups and "deniable cash payments",[52][31] and that his role had
grown after Manafort had left the campaign.[97][93] (Dossier, pp. 18,
30, 32, 34–35)
That "COHEN now was heavily engaged in a cover up and damage limitation
operation in the attempt to prevent the full details of TRUMP's
relationship with Russia being exposed."[93][86] (Dossier, p. 32)
Kremlin pro-Trump and anti-Clinton
That Putin feared and hated Hillary Clinton.[91][98] (Dossier, p. 7)
That there was a "Kremlin campaign to aid TRUMP and damage
CLINTON".[88][89] (Dossier, pp. 7, 13)
That Putin's interference operation had an "objective of weakening
CLINTON and bolstering TRUMP".[86] (Dossier, p. 17)
Kompromat and blackmail: Trump
That Trump "hated" Obama so much that when he stayed in the Presidential
suite of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Moscow,[9][99] he employed "a number
of prostitutes to perform a 'golden showers' (urination) show in front
of him"[83][64] in order to defile the bed used by the Obamas on an
earlier visit. The alleged incident from 2013 was reportedly filmed and
recorded by the FSB[100] as kompromat.[101][102][103] (Dossier, p. 2)
That Trump was susceptible to blackmail[38][85] due to paying bribes and
the existence of "embarrassing material" due to engagement in "perverted
sexual acts" and "unorthodox behavior" in Russia.[104][64][100]
(Dossier, pp. 1–2, 8, 11, 27)
That the Kremlin had assured Trump they would not use kompromat
collected against him, "given high levels of voluntary co-operation
forthcoming from his team."[85][105] (Dossier, pp. 11–12)
That Trump had explored the real estate sectors in St Petersburg and
Moscow, "but in the end TRUMP had had to settle for the use of extensive
sexual services there from local prostitutes rather than business
success".[102][101] (Dossier, p. 8)
That Trump has pursued real estate deals in St Petersburg, and "paid
bribes there to further his interests". That witnesses to his "sex
parties in the city" had been "'silenced' i.e. bribed or coerced to
disappear."[102][101] (Dossier, p. 27)
That Trump associates did not fear "the negative media publicity
surrounding alleged Russian interference", because it distracted
attention from his "business dealings in China and other emerging
markets", which involved "large bribes and kickbacks" that could be
devastating if revealed.[106][37] (Dossier, p. 8)
Kompromat: Clinton

Dmitry Peskov (2017)
That Putin ordered the maintenance of a secret dossier on Hillary
Clinton, with content dating back to the time of her husband's
presidency. The dossier comprised eavesdropped conversations, either
from bugging devices or from phone intercepts; it did not contain
"details/evidence of unorthodox or embarrassing behavior", but focused
more on "things she had said which contradicted her current positions on
various issues".[85][40] (Dossier, pp. 1, 3)
That the Clinton dossier had been collated by the FSB[85][40] and was
managed by Dmitry Peskov, Putin's press secretary.[100][41] (Dossier,
pp. 1, 3)
DNC email hack, leaks, and misinformation
That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[85][107] and the
recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[85][108] and
that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[109]
(Dossier, pp. 7–8)
That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and
support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[3][109]
(Dossier, p. 8)
That after the emails had been forwarded to WikiLeaks, it was decided to
not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics
would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what
already had been leaked and make up new content."[92] (Dossier, p. 15)
That Page had intended the email leaks "to swing supporters of Bernie
SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[93][98]
(Dossier, p. 17)
That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers
ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[52][31]
(Dossier, pp. 34–35)
That Cohen, together with three colleagues, secretly met with Kremlin
officials in the Prague offices of Rossotrudnichestvo in August
2016,[110][85][53][111] where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to
the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking
operation",[52][31] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia,
including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine".[3] (Dossier, pp. 18, 34–35)
Kickbacks and quid pro quo agreements
That Viktor Yanukovych, the former pro-Russian President of Ukraine, had
told Putin that he had been making supposedly untraceable[3] kickback
payments to Manafort while he was Trump's campaign manager.[109]
(Dossier, p. 20)
That in return for Russia's leaking the stolen documents to WikiLeaks,
"the TRUMP team had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine
as a campaign issue and to raise US/NATO defense commitments in the
Baltics and Eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine, a
priority for PUTIN who needed to cauterise the subject."[91][109]
(Dossier, pp. 7–8)
That Page had secretly met Rosneft chairman Igor Sechin in Moscow on
"either 7 or 8 July",[88] together with a "senior Kremlin Internal
Affairs official, DIVYEKIN." That Sechin "offered PAGE/TRUMP’s
associates the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatised) stake in
Rosneft" (worth about $11 billion) in exchange for Trump lifting the
sanctions against Russia after his election.[112][86][85][113][114]
(Dossier, pp. 9, 30–32)
Russian spy withdrawn
That Russia had hastily withdrawn from Washington their diplomat Mikhail
Kalugin (misspelled as "Kulagin"), whose prominent role in the
interference operation should remain hidden.[90][115][116] (Dossier, p. 23)
Cultivation of various U.S. political figures
That the Kremlin had been "supporting various US political figures", had
funded Moscow visits by Lyndon Larouche representatives, Jill Stein,
Carter Page and Michael Flynn, and was satisfied with the
outcome.[98][117] (Dossier, pp. 15–16)
Possible earlier interest in Trump
Although the dossier alleged in June 2016 that the Kremlin had been
cultivating Trump for "at least five years", Luke Harding wrote that the
Soviet Union had been interested in him since 1987. In his book
Collusion, Harding asserts that the "top level of the Soviet diplomatic
service arranged his 1987 Moscow visit. With assistance from the KGB."
Then-KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov "wanted KGB staff abroad to recruit
more Americans." Harding proceeds to describe the KGB's cultivation
process, and posits that they may have opened a file on Trump as early
as 1977, when he had married Czech model Ivana Zelníčková; the Soviet
spies may have closely observed and analyzed the couple from that time
on.[118][119]
John McAdams
2018-05-28 00:10:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
That "Russian authorities" had cultivated Trump "for at least 5 years",
and that the operation was "supported and directed" by Putin.[39][83]
(Dossier, p. 1)
That Putin aimed to spread "discord and disunity" within the United
States and between Western allies, whom he saw as a threat to Russia's
interests.[41][84] (Dossier, pp. 1–2)
That Trump was a "divisive" and "anti-Establishment" candidate, as well
as "a pragmatist with whom they could do business". That Trump would
remain a divisive force even if not elected.[85][86] (Dossier, p. 29)
That a major goal of the Russians in supporting Trump was "to upset the
liberal international status quo, including on Ukraine-related
sanctions, which was seriously disadvantaging the country.[85][86]
(Dossier, pp. 28–29)
You are quoting the Steele dossier!

You are quoting Russian disinformation, paid for by Hillary and the
DNC.

Even the Mainstream Media, when at attempt was made to leak it to
them, did not find it credible.

You have destroyed your own credibility.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
XXX
2018-05-28 23:25:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem


Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.

??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.

Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.

??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.

iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.

??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.

??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
John McAdams
2018-05-28 23:58:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Says the leftist who simply repeats stuff from the anti-Trump media.
Post by XXX
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Interesting that leftists, who have long distrusted U.S. security
agencies, and considered them villains, are happy to latch onto what
they say when convenient.

Most of the following is true, but some questionable.

And XXX is going to need to explain what his point it.
Post by XXX
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments.
That they wanted Trump elected is close to a bizarre conclusion.

They would have nothing to fear from Hillary with her "reset button,"
here association with Obama's feckless "red line" in Syria, and
refusal to put anti-missile defense in Poland, and so on.

Trump, on the other hand, they would have to consider a loose cannon,
and could not be sure what he would do.

Almost certainly, they simply wanted to weaken Hillary, whom they
assumed would be president.
Post by XXX
??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency.
That is a sensible statement.
Post by XXX
??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
Note: both major political parties.
Post by XXX
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
What is your point?

That, since the Russians did things to undermine Hillary, Hillary was
a good person, and should have been president?

That doesn't follow.

In fact, the Russians came down on *both* sides of domestic U.S.
conflicts.

http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2018/05/russian-facebook-influence-coming-down.html

You need to articulate your point.

So far, all we have seen is a bunch of vague leftist biases, but no
argument.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-30 19:37:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Says the leftist who simply repeats stuff from the anti-Trump media.
Post by XXX
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Interesting that leftists, who have long distrusted U.S. security
agencies, and considered them villains, are happy to latch onto what
they say when convenient.
Most of the following is true, but some questionable.
And XXX is going to need to explain what his point it.
And maybe YOU will have to explain what your point IS.
I think his point was that Trump supporters are traitors.
I think that's a little harsh. Maybe some are just goobers.
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments.
That they wanted Trump elected is close to a bizarre conclusion.
Not at all when you realize what their objective was. To Divide the US?
They didn't want it to be choice between 2 typical politicians.
They wanted their man in.
Post by John McAdams
They would have nothing to fear from Hillary with her "reset button,"
here association with Obama's feckless "red line" in Syria, and
refusal to put anti-missile defense in Poland, and so on.
Hillary was already the one the Russians hated because she would be just
like Obama and maintain the sanctions. WHo is profiting now from the
high price of gas? Do you think it's Hillary?
Post by John McAdams
Trump, on the other hand, they would have to consider a loose cannon,
and could not be sure what he would do.
Not sure what you mean Trump would have to BE considered a loose cannon?
That's what Russia wants. Instability. Not Obama 3.0.
Post by John McAdams
Almost certainly, they simply wanted to weaken Hillary, whom they
assumed would be president.
Post by XXX
??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency.
That is a sensible statement.
Post by XXX
??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
Note: both major political parties.
Post by XXX
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
What is your point?
They tested their new propaganda tools and they worked.
Post by John McAdams
That, since the Russians did things to undermine Hillary, Hillary was
a good person, and should have been president?
Geez, are you making an argument against Trump? SO if Hillary is good,
that means Trump is bad?
Post by John McAdams
That doesn't follow.
In fact, the Russians came down on *both* sides of domestic U.S.
conflicts.
On the Republican side, only to attack Trump's opponents.
When have the Russians ever attacked Trump?
Post by John McAdams
http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2018/05/russian-facebook-influence-coming-down.html
You need to articulate your point.
So far, all we have seen is a bunch of vague leftist biases, but no
argument.
So, you have trouble reading?
You think it's OK for Russia to attack us?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
bigdog
2018-05-30 19:46:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".

Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-01 00:46:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
SANCTIONS
Post by bigdog
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
So as usual when a woman is raped you blame the woman.
Post by bigdog
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
bpete1969
2018-06-01 00:47:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
The is the closest America has come to a European election. The communist
rigged the game against the socialist and then lost to the fascist.
claviger
2018-06-01 00:49:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
Then Putin is having a good laugh at the US Government:
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"

Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.

What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.

I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
character was a politician running for office who blurted out:

"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"

This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-01 20:36:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
bpete1969
2018-06-03 03:06:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-03 23:08:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
bpete1969
2018-06-04 22:16:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.

But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-08 01:08:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
bpete1969
2018-06-08 22:28:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.

The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.

Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
bigdog
2018-06-09 18:21:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-10 22:46:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.

If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
OHLeeRedux
2018-06-11 20:04:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
And therefore you are an expert on Gerrymandering.


This is the kind of inane thinking we're dealing with here, folks.
bigdog
2018-06-12 13:11:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
And therefore you are an expert on Gerrymandering.
This is the kind of inane thinking we're dealing with here, folks.
The real absurdity is that he keeps offering gerrymandering as an excuse
for Hillary's defeat yet he can't explain how gerrymandering could affect
the outcome of the electoral college nor will he admit he is wrong about
this even though he knows he is.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-13 02:44:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by OHLeeRedux
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
And therefore you are an expert on Gerrymandering.
This is the kind of inane thinking we're dealing with here, folks.
The real absurdity is that he keeps offering gerrymandering as an excuse
for Hillary's defeat yet he can't explain how gerrymandering could affect
the outcome of the electoral college nor will he admit he is wrong about
this even though he knows he is.
The Supreme Court explained it.
OHLeeRedux
2018-06-14 00:58:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Anthony Marsh
- show quoted text -
The Supreme Court explained it.



Really, Anthony? Did the Vice President cast the tie breaking vote? Was it
right after Nixon was impeached and before Clinton was not impeached?

Your pathetic one-line responses do nothing more than prove -- once again
-- that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Jason Burke
2018-06-14 23:46:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Anthony Marsh
- show quoted text -
The Supreme Court explained it.
Really, Anthony? Did the Vice President cast the tie breaking vote? Was it
right after Nixon was impeached and before Clinton was not impeached?
Your pathetic one-line responses do nothing more than prove -- once again
-- that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Oh *course* he doesn't. But ya gotta do something when the commercials
are on.

BOZ
2018-06-11 20:17:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
anthony have you ever watched fox news?
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-12 13:26:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
anthony have you ever watched fox news?
Yes, for 2 seconds while I was changing channels.
But remember that MSNBC often replays clips from Fox News just to show
how stupid they are.
claviger
2018-06-13 02:22:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
anthony have you ever watched fox news?
Yes, for 2 seconds while I was changing channels.
But remember that MSNBC often replays clips from Fox News just to show
how stupid they are.
Must be why Fox News is the Number One watched Cable News
Network.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-14 19:17:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
anthony have you ever watched fox news?
Yes, for 2 seconds while I was changing channels.
But remember that MSNBC often replays clips from Fox News just to show
how stupid they are.
Must be why Fox News is the Number One watched Cable News
Network.
Not always.
John McAdams
2018-06-11 20:22:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 10 Jun 2018 18:46:55 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
I live in the city where the typewriter was invented. That does not
make me an expert typist.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2018-06-12 13:26:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 10 Jun 2018 18:46:55 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
I live in the city where the typewriter was invented. That does not
make me an expert typist.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR KEYBOARD. DID YOU KNOW THAT THE LETTERS THAT MAKE UP
THE WORD TYPEWRITER ARE FOUND ON THE QWERTYUIOP PART OF YOUR KEYBOARD?
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-13 02:33:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by John McAdams
On 10 Jun 2018 18:46:55 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
I live in the city where the typewriter was invented. That does not
make me an expert typist.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR KEYBOARD. DID YOU KNOW THAT THE LETTERS THAT MAKE UP
THE WORD TYPEWRITER ARE FOUND ON THE QWERTYUIOP PART OF YOUR KEYBOARD?
Sounds like a conspiracy to me. ;]>
claviger
2018-06-12 12:42:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
A new tell-all about the Clinton campaign is a searing indictment of the
...
https://www.vox.com/2017/4/24/15369452/clinton-shattered-campaign

It does not take more than a few pages for journalists Jon Allen and Amie
Parnes to arrive at what amounts to their thesis in Shattered: Inside
Hillary Clinton’s Doomed 2016 Campaign, a new tell-all book built
off years of reporting on the trail.

“[Clinton’s] campaign was an unholy mess, fraught with
tangled lines of authority, petty jealousies, distorted priorities, and no
sense of greater purpose. No one was in charge, and no one had figured out
how to make the campaign about something bigger than Hillary,”
Allen and Parnes write in the book’s introduction. “[But]
no explanation of defeat can begin with anything other than the core
problem of Hillary’s campaign — Hillary herself.”

This book ends the nonsense about poor innocent Hillary being ambushed by
the Russians.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-13 14:15:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
A new tell-all about the Clinton campaign is a searing indictment of the
...
https://www.vox.com/2017/4/24/15369452/clinton-shattered-campaign
It does not take more than a few pages for journalists Jon Allen and Amie
Parnes to arrive at what amounts to their thesis in Shattered: Inside
Hillary Clinton’s Doomed 2016 Campaign, a new tell-all book built
off years of reporting on the trail.
“[Clinton’s] campaign was an unholy mess, fraught with
tangled lines of authority, petty jealousies, distorted priorities, and no
sense of greater purpose. No one was in charge, and no one had figured out
how to make the campaign about something bigger than Hillary,”
Allen and Parnes write in the book’s introduction. “[But]
no explanation of defeat can begin with anything other than the core
problem of Hillary’s campaign — Hillary herself.”
This book ends the nonsense about poor innocent Hillary being ambushed by
the Russians.
No, silly. Hillary won more votes than Trump so she much have been doing
something right. But Comey screwed it up.
bpete1969
2018-06-12 21:18:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
Bullshit. When did you start renting the Boston Weekly Messenger office?

There are several Supreme Court decisions ruling that gerrymandering is
legal.

Go back to muttering Marsh.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-13 14:54:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bpete1969
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
get out of the fox echo chamber...that's your problem
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in
Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D
6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent
the most recent expression of Moscow???s longstanding desire to undermine
the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US
presidential election. Russia???s goals were to undermine public faith in
the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her
electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.
We have high confidence in these judgments. ??? We also assess Putin and
the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump???s election
chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this
judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has
moderate confidence.
??? Moscow???s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on
Russia???s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main
candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely
to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on
undermining her future presidency. ??? Further information has come to
light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since
early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of
Russian motivations and goals.
Moscow???s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that
blends covert intelligence operations???such as cyber activity???with
overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media,
third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or ???trolls.???
Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert
influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used
intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage
candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin. ??? Russia???s
intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets
associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets
associated with both major US political parties.
??? We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence
(General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0
persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data This report is a
declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions
are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this
version does not include the full supporting information on key elements
of the influence campaign.
iii obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media
outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
??? Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of
multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types
of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in
vote tallying.
??? Russia???s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence
campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and
international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from
its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future
influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their
election procesess
The Russians have been trying to influence our elections going back to the
earliest days of the Cold War and maybe even earlier. We've been trying to
influence theirs for as long as they have had real elections. Some have
theorized Putin was just paying Hillary back for her meddling as SOS. I
doubt the efforts of either country has amounted to a hill of beans but
Democrats needed an excuse for Hillary's epic collapse and they seem to
have settled on blaming Putin. In effect they are saying the Russians just
did a better job of influencing our elections than we have influencing
theirs. It reminds me of the line from the movie "The Sting".
Doyle Lonnegan: What was I supposed to do? Accuse him of cheating better
than me in front of the others?
"What took you so long to figure it out?!"
Obama approved interfering with an Election in the Ukraine that
infuriated Putin. The Russians had been waiting for a chance at
payback. Since it was Democrat President who started this ping
pong match, the Russians focused on them.
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
Post by claviger
I can't remember if it was a movie or a book where one colorful
"I don't mind when they lie about me, but when
they tell the truth it really pisses me off!"
This must be the reason why Democrats are so mad at the Russians.
Can you please explain how in the hell the Russians overthrew our
By getting their agent Trump elected President.
Post by bpete1969
government? You've made some pretty stupid comments over the time I've
been frequenting this site but that has to be the most stupid of all.
So you will defend Trump at all costs.
Again, you're wrong. I didn't vote for Trump.
Again, learn English. I didn't say VOTE.
I said DEFEND. I know you didn't VOTE for Trump.
You were drunk that day and overslept.
Post by bpete1969
But, that fact aside, explain how Russia got their "agent" Trump elected.
Social Media.
Post by bpete1969
Hillary won the popular vote and Trump won the electoral vote. How did
they pull that off?
Republican Gerrymandering.
I take back what I said. THAT was the most stupid thing you've ever
posted.
The Russians got Trump elected through social media and directing the
Republicans to gerrymander the States of Wisconsin, Michigan and
Pennsylvania. Gerrymandered them to such a great extent as to knock them
off the map so Hillary couldn't find them.
Go back to mumbling in your soup, Marsh.
People who think gerrymandering could have affected the outcome of ANY
presidential race either don't know what gerrymandering is or don't know
how the electoral college works. That of course would include people like
Marsh. One has nothing to do with the other.
I live where Gerrymandering was invented. I went to the Gerry School.
There have been several Supreme Court decisions ruling that Gerrymandering
was used and is illegal.
If you can't read a newspaper, watch TV like Trump. They might even
mention it on Fox News.
Bullshit. When did you start renting the Boston Weekly Messenger office?
Nobody can remember that. Do you remember the Boston Phoenix?
Post by bpete1969
There are several Supreme Court decisions ruling that gerrymandering is
legal.
No.
Post by bpete1969
Go back to muttering Marsh.
claviger
2018-06-12 12:40:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Are you being serious? So you really are an extremist! I thought you
simply exaggerated just to get attention.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Like Campaign Headquarters? What did the Liberal Democrat
propaganda department say about the Republican candidate?
He screwed a Porn Queen and paid a lucrative user fee. Wow!
So compare that to Wild Willy the Gropaholic, that started the
trend of sex abuse all over the Decadent DC Den of Iniquity.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
What lies? The TRUTH was devastating to Hillary, Debbie, and Podesta!
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-13 14:16:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What did the Russians do that was so awful? They hacked some
They overthrew our government.
Are you being serious? So you really are an extremist! I thought you
simply exaggerated just to get attention.
Extremist? WTF is wrong with you? Pay attention. First time on the
InterNet? How long did it take you to figure that out?
Did McAdams have to tell you?
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Democrats and spread information that was true not propaganda.
False.
The outfit that did if was their propaganda department.
Like Campaign Headquarters? What did the Liberal Democrat
No like /PROP.
Post by claviger
propaganda department say about the Republican candidate?
SHow me their building.
Post by claviger
He screwed a Porn Queen and paid a lucrative user fee. Wow!
Prove it. Prove that Trump was even capable of screwing.
Post by claviger
So compare that to Wild Willy the Gropaholic, that started the
trend of sex abuse all over the Decadent DC Den of Iniquity.
Too verbose to make any sense.
hp
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
The truth was devastating to the Democratic presidential campaign.
Silly. Lies to help Trump win.
What lies? The TRUTH was devastating to Hillary, Debbie, and Podesta!
LIES
That Hillary broke the law.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-29 00:44:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
That "Russian authorities" had cultivated Trump "for at least 5 years",
and that the operation was "supported and directed" by Putin.[39][83]
(Dossier, p. 1)
That Putin aimed to spread "discord and disunity" within the United
States and between Western allies, whom he saw as a threat to Russia's
interests.[41][84] (Dossier, pp. 1–2)
That Trump was a "divisive" and "anti-Establishment" candidate, as well
as "a pragmatist with whom they could do business". That Trump would
remain a divisive force even if not elected.[85][86] (Dossier, p. 29)
That a major goal of the Russians in supporting Trump was "to upset the
liberal international status quo, including on Ukraine-related
sanctions, which was seriously disadvantaging the country.[85][86]
(Dossier, pp. 28–29)
You are quoting the Steele dossier!
You are quoting Russian disinformation, paid for by Hillary and the
DNC.
OMG! So you can't remember who originally paid for the Steele dossier or
you want to conveniently forget?
Republicans in glass houses shouldn't throw bricks.
Post by John McAdams
Even the Mainstream Media, when at attempt was made to leak it to
them, did not find it credible.
Tell us again what is the only news organization that you call the
Mainstream Media.
Post by John McAdams
You have destroyed your own credibility.
Keep repeating your Trump tactics. Do you have to pay him any royalties?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-29 00:44:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
That "Russian authorities" had cultivated Trump "for at least 5 years",
and that the operation was "supported and directed" by Putin.[39][83]
(Dossier, p. 1)
That Putin aimed to spread "discord and disunity" within the United
States and between Western allies, whom he saw as a threat to Russia's
interests.[41][84] (Dossier, pp. 1–2)
That Trump was a "divisive" and "anti-Establishment" candidate, as well
as "a pragmatist with whom they could do business". That Trump would
remain a divisive force even if not elected.[85][86] (Dossier, p. 29)
That a major goal of the Russians in supporting Trump was "to upset the
liberal international status quo, including on Ukraine-related
sanctions, which was seriously disadvantaging the country.[85][86]
(Dossier, pp. 28–29)
That the Russian government's support for Trump was originally conducted
by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, then by the Federal Security Service
(FSB), and was eventually directly handled by the Russian presidency
because of its "growing significance over time."[85][3] (Dossier, p. 29)
That Trump had "so far declined various sweetener real estate business
deals", but had "accepted a regular flow of intelligence from the
Kremlin," notably on his political rivals.[21][87] (Dossier, p. 1)
That there was "a well-developed conspiracy of co-operation between [the
Trump campaign] and the Russian leadership," with information willingly
exchanged in both directions. That this co-operation was "sanctioned at
highest levels and involving Russian diplomatic staff based in the US."
That the Trump campaign used "moles within DNC and hackers in the US as
well as outside in Russia."[88][89] (Dossier, p. 7)
That Trump associates had established "an intelligence exchange [with
the Kremlin] for at least 8 years." That Trump and his team had
delivered "intelligence on the activities, business and otherwise, in
the US of leading Russian oligarchs and their families", as requested by
Putin."[85][90][86] (Dossier, p. 11)
That the Trump camp became angry and resentful toward Putin when they
realized he was not only aiming to weaken Clinton and bolster Trump, but
was attempting to "undermine the US government and democratic system
more generally."[86] (Dossier, p. 17)
Key roles of Manafort, Cohen, and Page
That then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had "managed" the
"conspiracy of co-operation", and that he used Trump's foreign policy
adviser, Carter Page, and others, "as intermediaries".[91][92] (Dossier,
p. 7)
That Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of leaking the stolen
DNC emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 Democratic National
Convention.[93][84] (Dossier, pp. 7, 17)
That Cohen played a "key role" in the Trump–Russia relationship[3] by
maintaining a "covert relationship with Russia",[94][95][96] arranging
cover-ups and "deniable cash payments",[52][31] and that his role had
grown after Manafort had left the campaign.[97][93] (Dossier, pp. 18,
30, 32, 34–35)
That "COHEN now was heavily engaged in a cover up and damage limitation
operation in the attempt to prevent the full details of TRUMP's
relationship with Russia being exposed."[93][86] (Dossier, p. 32)
Kremlin pro-Trump and anti-Clinton
That Putin feared and hated Hillary Clinton.[91][98] (Dossier, p. 7)
That there was a "Kremlin campaign to aid TRUMP and damage
CLINTON".[88][89] (Dossier, pp. 7, 13)
That Putin's interference operation had an "objective of weakening
CLINTON and bolstering TRUMP".[86] (Dossier, p. 17)
Kompromat and blackmail: Trump
That Trump "hated" Obama so much that when he stayed in the Presidential
suite of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Moscow,[9][99] he employed "a number
of prostitutes to perform a 'golden showers' (urination) show in front
of him"[83][64] in order to defile the bed used by the Obamas on an
earlier visit. The alleged incident from 2013 was reportedly filmed and
recorded by the FSB[100] as kompromat.[101][102][103] (Dossier, p. 2)
That Trump was susceptible to blackmail[38][85] due to paying bribes and
the existence of "embarrassing material" due to engagement in "perverted
sexual acts" and "unorthodox behavior" in Russia.[104][64][100]
(Dossier, pp. 1–2, 8, 11, 27)
That the Kremlin had assured Trump they would not use kompromat
collected against him, "given high levels of voluntary co-operation
forthcoming from his team."[85][105] (Dossier, pp. 11–12)
That Trump had explored the real estate sectors in St Petersburg and
Moscow, "but in the end TRUMP had had to settle for the use of extensive
sexual services there from local prostitutes rather than business
success".[102][101] (Dossier, p. 8)
That Trump has pursued real estate deals in St Petersburg, and "paid
bribes there to further his interests". That witnesses to his "sex
parties in the city" had been "'silenced' i.e. bribed or coerced to
disappear."[102][101] (Dossier, p. 27)
That Trump associates did not fear "the negative media publicity
surrounding alleged Russian interference", because it distracted
attention from his "business dealings in China and other emerging
markets", which involved "large bribes and kickbacks" that could be
devastating if revealed.[106][37] (Dossier, p. 8)
Kompromat: Clinton
Dmitry Peskov (2017)
That Putin ordered the maintenance of a secret dossier on Hillary
Clinton, with content dating back to the time of her husband's
presidency. The dossier comprised eavesdropped conversations, either
from bugging devices or from phone intercepts; it did not contain
"details/evidence of unorthodox or embarrassing behavior", but focused
more on "things she had said which contradicted her current positions on
various issues".[85][40] (Dossier, pp. 1, 3)
That the Clinton dossier had been collated by the FSB[85][40] and was
managed by Dmitry Peskov, Putin's press secretary.[100][41] (Dossier,
pp. 1, 3)
DNC email hack, leaks, and misinformation
That Russia was responsible for the DNC email hacks[85][107] and the
recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,[85][108] and
that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "plausible deniability".[109]
(Dossier, pp. 7–8)
That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and
support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."[3][109]
(Dossier, p. 8)
That after the emails had been forwarded to WikiLeaks, it was decided to
not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics
would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what
already had been leaked and make up new content."[92] (Dossier, p. 15)
That Page had intended the email leaks "to swing supporters of Bernie
SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."[93][98]
(Dossier, p. 17)
That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers
ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.[52][31]
(Dossier, pp. 34–35)
That Cohen, together with three colleagues, secretly met with Kremlin
officials in the Prague offices of Rossotrudnichestvo in August
2016,[110][85][53][111] where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to
the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking
operation",[52][31] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia,
including Manafort's involvement in Ukraine".[3] (Dossier, pp. 18, 34–35)
Kickbacks and quid pro quo agreements
That Viktor Yanukovych, the former pro-Russian President of Ukraine, had
told Putin that he had been making supposedly untraceable[3] kickback
payments to Manafort while he was Trump's campaign manager.[109]
(Dossier, p. 20)
That in return for Russia's leaking the stolen documents to WikiLeaks,
"the TRUMP team had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine
as a campaign issue and to raise US/NATO defense commitments in the
Baltics and Eastern Europe to deflect attention away from Ukraine, a
priority for PUTIN who needed to cauterise the subject."[91][109]
(Dossier, pp. 7–8)
That Page had secretly met Rosneft chairman Igor Sechin in Moscow on
"either 7 or 8 July",[88] together with a "senior Kremlin Internal
Affairs official, DIVYEKIN." That Sechin "offered PAGE/TRUMP’s
associates the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatised) stake in
Rosneft" (worth about $11 billion) in exchange for Trump lifting the
sanctions against Russia after his election.[112][86][85][113][114]
(Dossier, pp. 9, 30–32)
Russian spy withdrawn
That Russia had hastily withdrawn from Washington their diplomat Mikhail
Kalugin (misspelled as "Kulagin"), whose prominent role in the
interference operation should remain hidden.[90][115][116] (Dossier, p. 23)
Cultivation of various U.S. political figures
That the Kremlin had been "supporting various US political figures", had
funded Moscow visits by Lyndon Larouche representatives, Jill Stein,
Carter Page and Michael Flynn, and was satisfied with the
outcome.[98][117] (Dossier, pp. 15–16)
Possible earlier interest in Trump
Although the dossier alleged in June 2016 that the Kremlin had been
cultivating Trump for "at least five years", Luke Harding wrote that the
Soviet Union had been interested in him since 1987. In his book
Collusion, Harding asserts that the "top level of the Soviet diplomatic
service arranged his 1987 Moscow visit. With assistance from the KGB."
Then-KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov "wanted KGB staff abroad to recruit
more Americans." Harding proceeds to describe the KGB's cultivation
process, and posits that they may have opened a file on Trump as early
as 1977, when he had married Czech model Ivana Zelníčková; the Soviet
spies may have closely observed and analyzed the couple from that time
on.[118][119]
Seems to be working pretty well here.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-28 20:12:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
So you really think Halper is going to be killed?
Really, Tony.
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2018-05-28 20:13:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On 28 May 2018 16:12:00 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Are you denying there is a liberal echo chamber, where the knee jerk
reaction is to attack Trump.

Do I have to post a list of all the bogus anti-Trump stories the
Mainstream Media have run?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-29 20:11:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 28 May 2018 16:12:00 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Are you denying there is a liberal echo chamber, where the knee jerk
reaction is to attack Trump.
Which one? My favorite is MSNBC. I am not denying anything.
I am saying it is proof that the Russian propaganda campaign is working.
To DIVIDE this country. And then conquer it. And you are helping them.
Post by John McAdams
Do I have to post a list of all the bogus anti-Trump stories the
Mainstream Media have run?
Yes. As leader of the Trump supporters it is your job here to keep your
minions up to date.

But then don't turn around and call it off-topic. And while you're at it
post every SEX story about ALL Democrats, but never any about Republicans.
Don't tell them about Roy Cohn spreading AIDS to all the little boys on
Fire Island. Don't tell them about Forbes importing all the little boys
from Morocco. Don't tell them about Terry Dolan (activist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

John Terrence "Terry" Dolan (1950 ??? December 28, 1986) was an American
New Right political activist who was a co-founder and chairman of the
National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC).[1] Dolan was
also, during the mid to late 1970s, in the leadership of Christian Voice,
"the nation's oldest conservative Christian lobby".[2]

While Dolan was a proponent of family values and the organizations he led
were persistently critical of gay rights, he was revealed to have been a
closeted homosexual [3][4][5][6] who frequented gay bars in Washington,
D.C.[7] He died from complications of AIDS at the age of 36. Always cover
up. Never tell the truth. Never admit anything.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
BOZ
2018-05-31 02:46:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 28 May 2018 16:12:00 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Are you denying there is a liberal echo chamber, where the knee jerk
reaction is to attack Trump.
Which one? My favorite is MSNBC. I am not denying anything.
I am saying it is proof that the Russian propaganda campaign is working.
To DIVIDE this country. And then conquer it. And you are helping them.
Post by John McAdams
Do I have to post a list of all the bogus anti-Trump stories the
Mainstream Media have run?
Yes. As leader of the Trump supporters it is your job here to keep your
minions up to date.
But then don't turn around and call it off-topic. And while you're at it
post every SEX story about ALL Democrats, but never any about Republicans.
Don't tell them about Roy Cohn spreading AIDS to all the little boys on
Fire Island. Don't tell them about Forbes importing all the little boys
from Morocco. Don't tell them about Terry Dolan (activist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Terrence "Terry" Dolan (1950 ??? December 28, 1986) was an American
New Right political activist who was a co-founder and chairman of the
National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC).[1] Dolan was
also, during the mid to late 1970s, in the leadership of Christian Voice,
"the nation's oldest conservative Christian lobby".[2]
While Dolan was a proponent of family values and the organizations he led
were persistently critical of gay rights, he was revealed to have been a
closeted homosexual [3][4][5][6] who frequented gay bars in Washington,
D.C.[7] He died from complications of AIDS at the age of 36. Always cover
up. Never tell the truth. Never admit anything.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Malcolm Forbes was a pervert. Donald Trump on page 30 in his 1990 memoir
Trump: Surviving at the Top, alleged that his temporary removal from the
Forbes 400 in the year Forbes died was due to a feud that had arisen after
Trump had not allowed Forbes to bring "two young men who appeared to be
well under the legal drinking age" into the bar at the Plaza Hotel. Trump
stated that Forbes "lived openly as a homosexual... but expected the media
and his famous friends to cover for him."
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-01 20:17:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 28 May 2018 16:12:00 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Are you denying there is a liberal echo chamber, where the knee jerk
reaction is to attack Trump.
Which one? My favorite is MSNBC. I am not denying anything.
I am saying it is proof that the Russian propaganda campaign is working.
To DIVIDE this country. And then conquer it. And you are helping them.
Post by John McAdams
Do I have to post a list of all the bogus anti-Trump stories the
Mainstream Media have run?
Yes. As leader of the Trump supporters it is your job here to keep your
minions up to date.
But then don't turn around and call it off-topic. And while you're at it
post every SEX story about ALL Democrats, but never any about Republicans.
Don't tell them about Roy Cohn spreading AIDS to all the little boys on
Fire Island. Don't tell them about Forbes importing all the little boys
from Morocco. Don't tell them about Terry Dolan (activist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Terrence "Terry" Dolan (1950 ??? December 28, 1986) was an American
New Right political activist who was a co-founder and chairman of the
National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC).[1] Dolan was
also, during the mid to late 1970s, in the leadership of Christian Voice,
"the nation's oldest conservative Christian lobby".[2]
While Dolan was a proponent of family values and the organizations he led
were persistently critical of gay rights, he was revealed to have been a
closeted homosexual [3][4][5][6] who frequented gay bars in Washington,
D.C.[7] He died from complications of AIDS at the age of 36. Always cover
up. Never tell the truth. Never admit anything.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Malcolm Forbes was a pervert. Donald Trump on page 30 in his 1990 memoir
Trump: Surviving at the Top, alleged that his temporary removal from the
Forbes 400 in the year Forbes died was due to a feud that had arisen after
Trump had not allowed Forbes to bring "two young men who appeared to be
well under the legal drinking age" into the bar at the Plaza Hotel. Trump
stated that Forbes "lived openly as a homosexual... but expected the media
and his famous friends to cover for him."
As Trump said, "When you're rich you can do anything."
BOZ
2018-05-31 02:46:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 28 May 2018 16:12:00 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Are you denying there is a liberal echo chamber, where the knee jerk
reaction is to attack Trump.
Which one? My favorite is MSNBC. I am not denying anything.
I am saying it is proof that the Russian propaganda campaign is working.
To DIVIDE this country. And then conquer it. And you are helping them.
Post by John McAdams
Do I have to post a list of all the bogus anti-Trump stories the
Mainstream Media have run?
Yes. As leader of the Trump supporters it is your job here to keep your
minions up to date.
But then don't turn around and call it off-topic. And while you're at it
post every SEX story about ALL Democrats, but never any about Republicans.
Don't tell them about Roy Cohn spreading AIDS to all the little boys on
Fire Island. Don't tell them about Forbes importing all the little boys
from Morocco. Don't tell them about Terry Dolan (activist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Terrence "Terry" Dolan (1950 ??? December 28, 1986) was an American
New Right political activist who was a co-founder and chairman of the
National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC).[1] Dolan was
also, during the mid to late 1970s, in the leadership of Christian Voice,
"the nation's oldest conservative Christian lobby".[2]
While Dolan was a proponent of family values and the organizations he led
were persistently critical of gay rights, he was revealed to have been a
closeted homosexual [3][4][5][6] who frequented gay bars in Washington,
D.C.[7] He died from complications of AIDS at the age of 36. Always cover
up. Never tell the truth. Never admit anything.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Roy Cohn was a registered Democrat.
Anthony Marsh
2018-06-01 20:16:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 28 May 2018 16:12:00 -0400, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
Post by John McAdams
On 25 May 2018 19:21:33 -0400, Anthony Marsh
stop the fox echo chamber bs
Can't supply a substantive response, can you?
Did you?
I won't echo what he just said, but he has a point.
Trump's supporters have a reflex defensive reaction to always defend
Trump no matter what he does and it is fed by Fox News. Trump is fed by
Fox News. Then Fox News is fed by Trump. It's an echo chamber.
Are you denying there is a liberal echo chamber, where the knee jerk
reaction is to attack Trump.
Which one? My favorite is MSNBC. I am not denying anything.
I am saying it is proof that the Russian propaganda campaign is working.
To DIVIDE this country. And then conquer it. And you are helping them.
Post by John McAdams
Do I have to post a list of all the bogus anti-Trump stories the
Mainstream Media have run?
Yes. As leader of the Trump supporters it is your job here to keep your
minions up to date.
But then don't turn around and call it off-topic. And while you're at it
post every SEX story about ALL Democrats, but never any about Republicans.
Don't tell them about Roy Cohn spreading AIDS to all the little boys on
Fire Island. Don't tell them about Forbes importing all the little boys
from Morocco. Don't tell them about Terry Dolan (activist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Terrence "Terry" Dolan (1950 ??? December 28, 1986) was an American
New Right political activist who was a co-founder and chairman of the
National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC).[1] Dolan was
also, during the mid to late 1970s, in the leadership of Christian Voice,
"the nation's oldest conservative Christian lobby".[2]
While Dolan was a proponent of family values and the organizations he led
were persistently critical of gay rights, he was revealed to have been a
closeted homosexual [3][4][5][6] who frequented gay bars in Washington,
D.C.[7] He died from complications of AIDS at the age of 36. Always cover
up. Never tell the truth. Never admit anything.
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Roy Cohn was a registered Democrat.
And Joseph McCarthy started out as a Democrat and then switched to
Republican when he became a Nazi.
BOZ
2018-05-26 23:16:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
The president’s legal team was unapologetic. “We are certainly entitled
to know” what information the government has on the F.B.I. informant,
Rudolph W. Giuliani, another lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the
investigation, said in an interview. The meeting “cuts off a long
subpoena,” he said, referring to a legal fight for the information.
At least two lawmakers participating in the briefings told Mr. Flood to
his face that his presence was inappropriate.
“Although he did not participate in the meetings which followed, as the
White House’s attorney handling the special counsel’s investigation, his
involvement — in any capacity — was entirely improper,” Representative
Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said in a statement.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign. He demanded in recent days
that the Justice Department investigate the matter and turn over records
to Congress, despite warnings from law enforcement officials in his
administration that sharing the documents would put the informant and
foreign intelligence partners at risk.
Law enforcement and intelligence officials did not provide documents to
the lawmakers on Thursday, but they did provide information about the
use of the informant, according to two people familiar with the matter.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified meeting.
Republicans close to Mr. Nunes made clear in the run-up to the meetings
that they would not be satisfied unless officials turned over documents.
Neither Mr. Nunes nor lawmakers close to him spoke publicly after
Thursday’s sessions.
Democrats who attended said after the meetings that the F.B.I. had done
nothing wrong by employing the informant, an American academic who
served in several Republican administrations and has taught more
recently in Britain.
“Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence
to support any allegation that the F.B.I. or any intelligence agency
placed a ‘spy’ in the Trump campaign, or otherwise failed to follow
appropriate procedures and protocols,” Mr. Schiff told reporters on
behalf of the Democrats in the briefing. He did not take questions.
White House officials had at first arranged for only Mr. Nunes to be
briefed. But Republican Senate leaders, including Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky, the majority leader, and Richard M. Burr of North Carolina,
the Intelligence Committee chairman, pressed the White House to change
the audience to the so-called Gang of Eight, the select bipartisan group
with whom the government’s most sensitive intelligence is shared.
Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Thursday that the Gang of Eight
meeting was an “appropriate way to convey whatever information the
administration had to convey,” but he declined to critique Mr. Trump’s
charges of illegal spying.
As Mr. Trump continued to fan unsubstantiated claims that partisan
Democrats had planted a spy in his campaign, the logistics for the
meetings shifted several times.
Ultimately, Mr. Schiff was allowed to attend a morning session that had
previously been offered to just Mr. Nunes, Speaker Paul D. Ryan of
Wisconsin and another Republican congressman. The Gang of Eight met
later Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Flood’s presence at the meetings was entirely unexpected. While Mr.
Kelly helped arrange the meetings at Mr. Trump’s request, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said no White House staff
members would attend. Guidance circulated by the Justice Department late
Wednesday did not include Mr. Flood among the invitees.
“For the record, the President’s Chief of Staff and his attorney in an
ongoing criminal investigation into the President’s campaign have no
business showing up to a classified intelligence briefing,” Senator Mark
Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said
on Twitter.
When Democrats confronted Mr. Flood in the Gang of Eight meeting, Mr.
Kelly intervened and dismissed their criticism, according to one of the
officials familiar with the meeting.
Democrats tried to start their own inquiry. Representative Jerrold
Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, made a formal request for the Justice Department to
investigate the disclosure of the confidential informant’s name and
existence to the news media.
Image
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the
Intelligence Committee chairman, has been quiet about what exactly he
hopes to learn about the informant.CreditLeah Millis/Reuters
While there is no constitutional provision that says the president’s
personal lawyer cannot make a statement at a classified briefing, legal
scholars expressed misgivings.
“Even if Flood wasn’t there for any operative parts of the meeting, the
optics are disquieting,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the
University of Texas School of Law. “Rather than being sensitive to the
clear potential conflict this creates, the president is driving a truck
through the middle of it. Historically, a president would be very
careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict, as opposed to relishing
in it.”
Mr. Ryan, who has been criticized for not reining in House Republican
attacks on the Russia inquiry and federal law enforcement, defended the
unusual meetings.
Inherent in the Intelligence Committee’s work “is the responsibility to
ask tough questions of the executive branch,” he said in a statement.
“That is why we have insisted and will continue to insist on Congress’s
constitutional right to information necessary for the conduct of oversight.”
Mr. Nunes, a loyal ally of Mr. Trump who advised his presidential
transition, has been quiet about what exactly he hoped to learn about
the informant, saying only that his late-April request was part of an
oversight investigation into potential political bias and abuse of power
within the Justice Department as it relates to the Russia investigation.
It was the latest in a series of bold demands for classified documents
and testimony related to the Russia inquiry — and far from his first
open confrontation with top Republican officials in the department. And
it echoed another episode, from last spring, in which Mr. Trump falsely
claimed that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, and Mr.
Nunes went public with information that he said showed the Obama
administration had “incidentally” collected intelligence on Trump
associates.
Democrats say that the latest episode — including the president’s
involvement — is the most recent gambit by Mr. Nunes and Mr. Trump to
undermine the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gain
information about his inquiry.
Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy
attorney general; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence,
along with other law enforcement and intelligence officials.
Mr. Trump continued to rail against law enforcement on Twitter on
Thursday, repeating his unsubstantiated claims. “Large dollars were paid
to the Spy, far beyond normal,” he said, without citing evidence, before
referring to the matter as “one of the biggest political scandals in
U.S. history.”
Five former top American intelligence officials who have worked for
Democratic and Republican administrations, including Leon E. Panetta and
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, warned on Wednesday that House Republicans were
putting at risk the tradition of bipartisan oversight of intelligence.
“When congressional oversight is overly partisan — or focused on
undermining important counterintelligence investigations — we worry
about inappropriate political influence on the investigators and the
erosion of a bipartisan approach to intelligence and national security,”
they wrote in an open letter.
Reporting was contributed by Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman from
New York, and Adam Goldman, Thomas Kaplan and Charlie Savage from
Washington.
Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the
Morning Briefing newsletter.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New
York edition with the headline: Trump Proxies Drop by Briefings on
Russia Case. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Related Coverage
F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to
Spy, as Trump Claims
May 18, 2018
Image
Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
May 16, 2018
Image
Trump Repeats Unconfirmed Claims of Campaign Spying
May 23, 2018
Image
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
news
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH FRANK BENDER AND EMILIO SANTANA?
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-28 00:13:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
The president’s legal team was unapologetic. “We are certainly entitled
to know” what information the government has on the F.B.I. informant,
Rudolph W. Giuliani, another lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the
investigation, said in an interview. The meeting “cuts off a long
subpoena,” he said, referring to a legal fight for the information.
At least two lawmakers participating in the briefings told Mr. Flood to
his face that his presence was inappropriate.
“Although he did not participate in the meetings which followed, as the
White House’s attorney handling the special counsel’s investigation, his
involvement — in any capacity — was entirely improper,” Representative
Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said in a statement.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign. He demanded in recent days
that the Justice Department investigate the matter and turn over records
to Congress, despite warnings from law enforcement officials in his
administration that sharing the documents would put the informant and
foreign intelligence partners at risk.
Law enforcement and intelligence officials did not provide documents to
the lawmakers on Thursday, but they did provide information about the
use of the informant, according to two people familiar with the matter.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified meeting.
Republicans close to Mr. Nunes made clear in the run-up to the meetings
that they would not be satisfied unless officials turned over documents.
Neither Mr. Nunes nor lawmakers close to him spoke publicly after
Thursday’s sessions.
Democrats who attended said after the meetings that the F.B.I. had done
nothing wrong by employing the informant, an American academic who
served in several Republican administrations and has taught more
recently in Britain.
“Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence
to support any allegation that the F.B.I. or any intelligence agency
placed a ‘spy’ in the Trump campaign, or otherwise failed to follow
appropriate procedures and protocols,” Mr. Schiff told reporters on
behalf of the Democrats in the briefing. He did not take questions.
White House officials had at first arranged for only Mr. Nunes to be
briefed. But Republican Senate leaders, including Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky, the majority leader, and Richard M. Burr of North Carolina,
the Intelligence Committee chairman, pressed the White House to change
the audience to the so-called Gang of Eight, the select bipartisan group
with whom the government’s most sensitive intelligence is shared.
Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Thursday that the Gang of Eight
meeting was an “appropriate way to convey whatever information the
administration had to convey,” but he declined to critique Mr. Trump’s
charges of illegal spying.
As Mr. Trump continued to fan unsubstantiated claims that partisan
Democrats had planted a spy in his campaign, the logistics for the
meetings shifted several times.
Ultimately, Mr. Schiff was allowed to attend a morning session that had
previously been offered to just Mr. Nunes, Speaker Paul D. Ryan of
Wisconsin and another Republican congressman. The Gang of Eight met
later Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Flood’s presence at the meetings was entirely unexpected. While Mr.
Kelly helped arrange the meetings at Mr. Trump’s request, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said no White House staff
members would attend. Guidance circulated by the Justice Department late
Wednesday did not include Mr. Flood among the invitees.
“For the record, the President’s Chief of Staff and his attorney in an
ongoing criminal investigation into the President’s campaign have no
business showing up to a classified intelligence briefing,” Senator Mark
Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said
on Twitter.
When Democrats confronted Mr. Flood in the Gang of Eight meeting, Mr.
Kelly intervened and dismissed their criticism, according to one of the
officials familiar with the meeting.
Democrats tried to start their own inquiry. Representative Jerrold
Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, made a formal request for the Justice Department to
investigate the disclosure of the confidential informant’s name and
existence to the news media.
Image
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the
Intelligence Committee chairman, has been quiet about what exactly he
hopes to learn about the informant.CreditLeah Millis/Reuters
While there is no constitutional provision that says the president’s
personal lawyer cannot make a statement at a classified briefing, legal
scholars expressed misgivings.
“Even if Flood wasn’t there for any operative parts of the meeting, the
optics are disquieting,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the
University of Texas School of Law. “Rather than being sensitive to the
clear potential conflict this creates, the president is driving a truck
through the middle of it. Historically, a president would be very
careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict, as opposed to relishing
in it.”
Mr. Ryan, who has been criticized for not reining in House Republican
attacks on the Russia inquiry and federal law enforcement, defended the
unusual meetings.
Inherent in the Intelligence Committee’s work “is the responsibility to
ask tough questions of the executive branch,” he said in a statement.
“That is why we have insisted and will continue to insist on Congress’s
constitutional right to information necessary for the conduct of oversight.”
Mr. Nunes, a loyal ally of Mr. Trump who advised his presidential
transition, has been quiet about what exactly he hoped to learn about
the informant, saying only that his late-April request was part of an
oversight investigation into potential political bias and abuse of power
within the Justice Department as it relates to the Russia investigation.
It was the latest in a series of bold demands for classified documents
and testimony related to the Russia inquiry — and far from his first
open confrontation with top Republican officials in the department. And
it echoed another episode, from last spring, in which Mr. Trump falsely
claimed that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, and Mr.
Nunes went public with information that he said showed the Obama
administration had “incidentally” collected intelligence on Trump
associates.
Democrats say that the latest episode — including the president’s
involvement — is the most recent gambit by Mr. Nunes and Mr. Trump to
undermine the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gain
information about his inquiry.
Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy
attorney general; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence,
along with other law enforcement and intelligence officials.
Mr. Trump continued to rail against law enforcement on Twitter on
Thursday, repeating his unsubstantiated claims. “Large dollars were paid
to the Spy, far beyond normal,” he said, without citing evidence, before
referring to the matter as “one of the biggest political scandals in
U.S. history.”
Five former top American intelligence officials who have worked for
Democratic and Republican administrations, including Leon E. Panetta and
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, warned on Wednesday that House Republicans were
putting at risk the tradition of bipartisan oversight of intelligence.
“When congressional oversight is overly partisan — or focused on
undermining important counterintelligence investigations — we worry
about inappropriate political influence on the investigators and the
erosion of a bipartisan approach to intelligence and national security,”
they wrote in an open letter.
Reporting was contributed by Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman from
New York, and Adam Goldman, Thomas Kaplan and Charlie Savage from
Washington.
Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the
Morning Briefing newsletter.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New
York edition with the headline: Trump Proxies Drop by Briefings on
Russia Case. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Related Coverage
F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to
Spy, as Trump Claims
May 18, 2018
Image
Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
May 16, 2018
Image
Trump Repeats Unconfirmed Claims of Campaign Spying
May 23, 2018
Image
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
news
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH FRANK BENDER AND EMILIO SANTANA?
I revealed Frank Bender's name and he was a CIA officer.
I never said Emilio Santana was a contract agent of the CIA.
BOZ
2018-05-28 20:28:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
The president’s legal team was unapologetic. “We are certainly entitled
to know” what information the government has on the F.B.I. informant,
Rudolph W. Giuliani, another lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the
investigation, said in an interview. The meeting “cuts off a long
subpoena,” he said, referring to a legal fight for the information.
At least two lawmakers participating in the briefings told Mr. Flood to
his face that his presence was inappropriate.
“Although he did not participate in the meetings which followed, as the
White House’s attorney handling the special counsel’s investigation, his
involvement — in any capacity — was entirely improper,” Representative
Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said in a statement.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign. He demanded in recent days
that the Justice Department investigate the matter and turn over records
to Congress, despite warnings from law enforcement officials in his
administration that sharing the documents would put the informant and
foreign intelligence partners at risk.
Law enforcement and intelligence officials did not provide documents to
the lawmakers on Thursday, but they did provide information about the
use of the informant, according to two people familiar with the matter.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified meeting.
Republicans close to Mr. Nunes made clear in the run-up to the meetings
that they would not be satisfied unless officials turned over documents.
Neither Mr. Nunes nor lawmakers close to him spoke publicly after
Thursday’s sessions.
Democrats who attended said after the meetings that the F.B.I. had done
nothing wrong by employing the informant, an American academic who
served in several Republican administrations and has taught more
recently in Britain.
“Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence
to support any allegation that the F.B.I. or any intelligence agency
placed a ‘spy’ in the Trump campaign, or otherwise failed to follow
appropriate procedures and protocols,” Mr. Schiff told reporters on
behalf of the Democrats in the briefing. He did not take questions.
White House officials had at first arranged for only Mr. Nunes to be
briefed. But Republican Senate leaders, including Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky, the majority leader, and Richard M. Burr of North Carolina,
the Intelligence Committee chairman, pressed the White House to change
the audience to the so-called Gang of Eight, the select bipartisan group
with whom the government’s most sensitive intelligence is shared.
Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Thursday that the Gang of Eight
meeting was an “appropriate way to convey whatever information the
administration had to convey,” but he declined to critique Mr. Trump’s
charges of illegal spying.
As Mr. Trump continued to fan unsubstantiated claims that partisan
Democrats had planted a spy in his campaign, the logistics for the
meetings shifted several times.
Ultimately, Mr. Schiff was allowed to attend a morning session that had
previously been offered to just Mr. Nunes, Speaker Paul D. Ryan of
Wisconsin and another Republican congressman. The Gang of Eight met
later Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Flood’s presence at the meetings was entirely unexpected. While Mr.
Kelly helped arrange the meetings at Mr. Trump’s request, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said no White House staff
members would attend. Guidance circulated by the Justice Department late
Wednesday did not include Mr. Flood among the invitees.
“For the record, the President’s Chief of Staff and his attorney in an
ongoing criminal investigation into the President’s campaign have no
business showing up to a classified intelligence briefing,” Senator Mark
Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said
on Twitter.
When Democrats confronted Mr. Flood in the Gang of Eight meeting, Mr.
Kelly intervened and dismissed their criticism, according to one of the
officials familiar with the meeting.
Democrats tried to start their own inquiry. Representative Jerrold
Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, made a formal request for the Justice Department to
investigate the disclosure of the confidential informant’s name and
existence to the news media.
Image
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the
Intelligence Committee chairman, has been quiet about what exactly he
hopes to learn about the informant.CreditLeah Millis/Reuters
While there is no constitutional provision that says the president’s
personal lawyer cannot make a statement at a classified briefing, legal
scholars expressed misgivings.
“Even if Flood wasn’t there for any operative parts of the meeting, the
optics are disquieting,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the
University of Texas School of Law. “Rather than being sensitive to the
clear potential conflict this creates, the president is driving a truck
through the middle of it. Historically, a president would be very
careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict, as opposed to relishing
in it.”
Mr. Ryan, who has been criticized for not reining in House Republican
attacks on the Russia inquiry and federal law enforcement, defended the
unusual meetings.
Inherent in the Intelligence Committee’s work “is the responsibility to
ask tough questions of the executive branch,” he said in a statement.
“That is why we have insisted and will continue to insist on Congress’s
constitutional right to information necessary for the conduct of oversight.”
Mr. Nunes, a loyal ally of Mr. Trump who advised his presidential
transition, has been quiet about what exactly he hoped to learn about
the informant, saying only that his late-April request was part of an
oversight investigation into potential political bias and abuse of power
within the Justice Department as it relates to the Russia investigation.
It was the latest in a series of bold demands for classified documents
and testimony related to the Russia inquiry — and far from his first
open confrontation with top Republican officials in the department. And
it echoed another episode, from last spring, in which Mr. Trump falsely
claimed that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, and Mr.
Nunes went public with information that he said showed the Obama
administration had “incidentally” collected intelligence on Trump
associates.
Democrats say that the latest episode — including the president’s
involvement — is the most recent gambit by Mr. Nunes and Mr. Trump to
undermine the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gain
information about his inquiry.
Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy
attorney general; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence,
along with other law enforcement and intelligence officials.
Mr. Trump continued to rail against law enforcement on Twitter on
Thursday, repeating his unsubstantiated claims. “Large dollars were paid
to the Spy, far beyond normal,” he said, without citing evidence, before
referring to the matter as “one of the biggest political scandals in
U.S. history.”
Five former top American intelligence officials who have worked for
Democratic and Republican administrations, including Leon E. Panetta and
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, warned on Wednesday that House Republicans were
putting at risk the tradition of bipartisan oversight of intelligence.
“When congressional oversight is overly partisan — or focused on
undermining important counterintelligence investigations — we worry
about inappropriate political influence on the investigators and the
erosion of a bipartisan approach to intelligence and national security,”
they wrote in an open letter.
Reporting was contributed by Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman from
New York, and Adam Goldman, Thomas Kaplan and Charlie Savage from
Washington.
Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the
Morning Briefing newsletter.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New
York edition with the headline: Trump Proxies Drop by Briefings on
Russia Case. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Related Coverage
F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to
Spy, as Trump Claims
May 18, 2018
Image
Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
May 16, 2018
Image
Trump Repeats Unconfirmed Claims of Campaign Spying
May 23, 2018
Image
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
news
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH FRANK BENDER AND EMILIO SANTANA?
I revealed Frank Bender's name and he was a CIA officer.
I never said Emilio Santana was a contract agent of the CIA.
DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER. YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT THEY WERE IN DEALEY PLAZA.
claviger
2018-05-28 23:19:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by BOZ
WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH FRANK BENDER AND EMILIO SANTANA?
I revealed Frank Bender's name and he was a CIA officer.
I never said Emilio Santana was a contract agent of the CIA.
Bender is going to bend your fender one day if you don't stop accusing
him of being the SOTGK with zero evidence: no proof and no witness.
BOZ
2018-05-27 00:03:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
The president’s legal team was unapologetic. “We are certainly entitled
to know” what information the government has on the F.B.I. informant,
Rudolph W. Giuliani, another lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the
investigation, said in an interview. The meeting “cuts off a long
subpoena,” he said, referring to a legal fight for the information.
At least two lawmakers participating in the briefings told Mr. Flood to
his face that his presence was inappropriate.
“Although he did not participate in the meetings which followed, as the
White House’s attorney handling the special counsel’s investigation, his
involvement — in any capacity — was entirely improper,” Representative
Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said in a statement.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign. He demanded in recent days
that the Justice Department investigate the matter and turn over records
to Congress, despite warnings from law enforcement officials in his
administration that sharing the documents would put the informant and
foreign intelligence partners at risk.
Law enforcement and intelligence officials did not provide documents to
the lawmakers on Thursday, but they did provide information about the
use of the informant, according to two people familiar with the matter.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified meeting.
Republicans close to Mr. Nunes made clear in the run-up to the meetings
that they would not be satisfied unless officials turned over documents.
Neither Mr. Nunes nor lawmakers close to him spoke publicly after
Thursday’s sessions.
Democrats who attended said after the meetings that the F.B.I. had done
nothing wrong by employing the informant, an American academic who
served in several Republican administrations and has taught more
recently in Britain.
“Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence
to support any allegation that the F.B.I. or any intelligence agency
placed a ‘spy’ in the Trump campaign, or otherwise failed to follow
appropriate procedures and protocols,” Mr. Schiff told reporters on
behalf of the Democrats in the briefing. He did not take questions.
White House officials had at first arranged for only Mr. Nunes to be
briefed. But Republican Senate leaders, including Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky, the majority leader, and Richard M. Burr of North Carolina,
the Intelligence Committee chairman, pressed the White House to change
the audience to the so-called Gang of Eight, the select bipartisan group
with whom the government’s most sensitive intelligence is shared.
Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Thursday that the Gang of Eight
meeting was an “appropriate way to convey whatever information the
administration had to convey,” but he declined to critique Mr. Trump’s
charges of illegal spying.
As Mr. Trump continued to fan unsubstantiated claims that partisan
Democrats had planted a spy in his campaign, the logistics for the
meetings shifted several times.
Ultimately, Mr. Schiff was allowed to attend a morning session that had
previously been offered to just Mr. Nunes, Speaker Paul D. Ryan of
Wisconsin and another Republican congressman. The Gang of Eight met
later Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Flood’s presence at the meetings was entirely unexpected. While Mr.
Kelly helped arrange the meetings at Mr. Trump’s request, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said no White House staff
members would attend. Guidance circulated by the Justice Department late
Wednesday did not include Mr. Flood among the invitees.
“For the record, the President’s Chief of Staff and his attorney in an
ongoing criminal investigation into the President’s campaign have no
business showing up to a classified intelligence briefing,” Senator Mark
Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said
on Twitter.
When Democrats confronted Mr. Flood in the Gang of Eight meeting, Mr.
Kelly intervened and dismissed their criticism, according to one of the
officials familiar with the meeting.
Democrats tried to start their own inquiry. Representative Jerrold
Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, made a formal request for the Justice Department to
investigate the disclosure of the confidential informant’s name and
existence to the news media.
Image
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the
Intelligence Committee chairman, has been quiet about what exactly he
hopes to learn about the informant.CreditLeah Millis/Reuters
While there is no constitutional provision that says the president’s
personal lawyer cannot make a statement at a classified briefing, legal
scholars expressed misgivings.
“Even if Flood wasn’t there for any operative parts of the meeting, the
optics are disquieting,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the
University of Texas School of Law. “Rather than being sensitive to the
clear potential conflict this creates, the president is driving a truck
through the middle of it. Historically, a president would be very
careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict, as opposed to relishing
in it.”
Mr. Ryan, who has been criticized for not reining in House Republican
attacks on the Russia inquiry and federal law enforcement, defended the
unusual meetings.
Inherent in the Intelligence Committee’s work “is the responsibility to
ask tough questions of the executive branch,” he said in a statement.
“That is why we have insisted and will continue to insist on Congress’s
constitutional right to information necessary for the conduct of oversight.”
Mr. Nunes, a loyal ally of Mr. Trump who advised his presidential
transition, has been quiet about what exactly he hoped to learn about
the informant, saying only that his late-April request was part of an
oversight investigation into potential political bias and abuse of power
within the Justice Department as it relates to the Russia investigation.
It was the latest in a series of bold demands for classified documents
and testimony related to the Russia inquiry — and far from his first
open confrontation with top Republican officials in the department. And
it echoed another episode, from last spring, in which Mr. Trump falsely
claimed that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, and Mr.
Nunes went public with information that he said showed the Obama
administration had “incidentally” collected intelligence on Trump
associates.
Democrats say that the latest episode — including the president’s
involvement — is the most recent gambit by Mr. Nunes and Mr. Trump to
undermine the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gain
information about his inquiry.
Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy
attorney general; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence,
along with other law enforcement and intelligence officials.
Mr. Trump continued to rail against law enforcement on Twitter on
Thursday, repeating his unsubstantiated claims. “Large dollars were paid
to the Spy, far beyond normal,” he said, without citing evidence, before
referring to the matter as “one of the biggest political scandals in
U.S. history.”
Five former top American intelligence officials who have worked for
Democratic and Republican administrations, including Leon E. Panetta and
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, warned on Wednesday that House Republicans were
putting at risk the tradition of bipartisan oversight of intelligence.
“When congressional oversight is overly partisan — or focused on
undermining important counterintelligence investigations — we worry
about inappropriate political influence on the investigators and the
erosion of a bipartisan approach to intelligence and national security,”
they wrote in an open letter.
Reporting was contributed by Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman from
New York, and Adam Goldman, Thomas Kaplan and Charlie Savage from
Washington.
Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the
Morning Briefing newsletter.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New
York edition with the headline: Trump Proxies Drop by Briefings on
Russia Case. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Related Coverage
F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to
Spy, as Trump Claims
May 18, 2018
Image
Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
May 16, 2018
Image
Trump Repeats Unconfirmed Claims of Campaign Spying
May 23, 2018
Image
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
news
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29123-trump-spygate-could-be-one-of-the-biggest-political-scandals-in-history
XXX
2018-05-28 00:10:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
https://www.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>thenewamerican.com<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
speaking of fox news and the alt right echo chamber...

The New American (TNA) is a print magazine published twice a month by
American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John
Birch Society (JBS), an organization which has been described as a
radical right and far-right organization.[2][3][4][5] The magazine was
created in 1985 from the merger of two JBS magazines: American Opinion
and The Review of the News.
John McAdams
2018-05-28 00:11:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
https://www.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>thenewamerican.com<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
speaking of fox news and the alt right echo chamber...
The New American (TNA) is a print magazine published twice a month by
American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John
Birch Society (JBS), an organization which has been described as a
radical right and far-right organization.[2][3][4][5] The magazine was
created in 1985 from the merger of two JBS magazines: American Opinion
and The Review of the News.
This from the fellow who quoted the Steele dossier.

People who live in glass houses . . . . remember?

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
XXX
2018-05-28 23:59:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
https://www.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>thenewamerican.com<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
speaking of fox news and the alt right echo chamber...
The New American (TNA) is a a wholly owned subsidiary of the John
Birch Society (JBS), an organization which has been described as a
radical right and far-right organization.
People who live in glass houses . . . . remember?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
wake up America


https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-29 00:44:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
Post by XXX
https://www.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>thenewamerican.com<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
speaking of fox news and the alt right echo chamber...
The New American (TNA) is a print magazine published twice a month by
American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John
Birch Society (JBS), an organization which has been described as a
radical right and far-right organization.[2][3][4][5] The magazine was
created in 1985 from the merger of two JBS magazines: American Opinion
and The Review of the News.
This from the fellow who quoted the Steele dossier.
WHO? You mean XXX? You don't even know who he is. You didn't see that
movie, homey.
He is just confirming my point.
Post by John McAdams
People who live in glass houses . . . . remember?
Why didn't you point out my hypocrisy of posting the article from the
American Opinion pamphlet? Do I have to do everything for you?
Post by John McAdams
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-29 00:44:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by XXX
https://www.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>thenewamerican.com<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
speaking of fox news and the alt right echo chamber...
The New American (TNA) is a print magazine published twice a month by
American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John
Birch Society (JBS), an organization which has been described as a
radical right and far-right organization.[2][3][4][5] The magazine was
created in 1985 from the merger of two JBS magazines: American Opinion
and The Review of the News.
Yup. I think .John knew that already, but maybe BOZ did not.
BOZ
2018-05-30 01:42:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by XXX
https://www.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>thenewamerican.com<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
speaking of fox news and the alt right echo chamber...
The New American (TNA) is a print magazine published twice a month by
American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John
Birch Society (JBS), an organization which has been described as a
radical right and far-right organization.[2][3][4][5] The magazine was
created in 1985 from the merger of two JBS magazines: American Opinion
and The Review of the News.
Yup. I think .John knew that already, but maybe BOZ did not.
I KNOW THAT. THAT IS WHY I POSTED IT. YOU GUYS START TO PANIC AND I START
LAUGHING.I LOVE TO READ YOUR REACTIONS TO AN ARTICLE WRITTEN BY A JOHN
BIRCH SOCIETY MEMBER.
Anthony Marsh
2018-05-28 14:26:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BOZ
Post by Anthony Marsh
Trump’s Lawyer and Chief of Staff Appear at Briefings on F.B.I.’s Russia
Informant
Image
Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, on Thursday.CreditTom
Brenner/The New York Times
By Nicholas Fandos and Katie Benner
May 24, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s chief of staff and a White House lawyer
representing the president in the Russia investigation were present on
Thursday at the start of two classified meetings requested by members of
Congress to review sensitive material about the F.B.I.’s use of an
informant in the inquiry.
The two men left both meetings after sharing introductory remarks “to
relay the president’s desire for as much openness as possible under the
law” and before officials began to brief the lawmakers, the White House
said in a statement.
But the presence of John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, and Emmet T.
Flood, the president’s lawyer, infuriated Democrats, and legal experts
said their visit, at the least, could give off the appearance that the
White House abused its authority to gain insight into an investigation
that implicates the president.
The president’s legal team was unapologetic. “We are certainly entitled
to know” what information the government has on the F.B.I. informant,
Rudolph W. Giuliani, another lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the
investigation, said in an interview. The meeting “cuts off a long
subpoena,” he said, referring to a legal fight for the information.
At least two lawmakers participating in the briefings told Mr. Flood to
his face that his presence was inappropriate.
“Although he did not participate in the meetings which followed, as the
White House’s attorney handling the special counsel’s investigation, his
involvement — in any capacity — was entirely improper,” Representative
Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said in a statement.
House Republicans close to the president, led by Representative Devin
Nunes of California, the committee’s chairman, had been pressing for
weeks for access to material related to a law enforcement informant who
had approached at least three Trump campaign advisers who had been in
contact with suspected Russian agents. People familiar with the matter
said that the purpose of using the informant — a common F.B.I. tool —
was to glean information about what the aides knew about the Russian
efforts to hack into Democratic emails, not to spy on Mr. Trump’s campaign.
But the issue exploded when Mr. Trump accused the F.B.I., without
evidence, of planting a spy in his campaign. He demanded in recent days
that the Justice Department investigate the matter and turn over records
to Congress, despite warnings from law enforcement officials in his
administration that sharing the documents would put the informant and
foreign intelligence partners at risk.
Law enforcement and intelligence officials did not provide documents to
the lawmakers on Thursday, but they did provide information about the
use of the informant, according to two people familiar with the matter.
They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified meeting.
Republicans close to Mr. Nunes made clear in the run-up to the meetings
that they would not be satisfied unless officials turned over documents.
Neither Mr. Nunes nor lawmakers close to him spoke publicly after
Thursday’s sessions.
Democrats who attended said after the meetings that the F.B.I. had done
nothing wrong by employing the informant, an American academic who
served in several Republican administrations and has taught more
recently in Britain.
“Nothing we heard today has changed our view that there is no evidence
to support any allegation that the F.B.I. or any intelligence agency
placed a ‘spy’ in the Trump campaign, or otherwise failed to follow
appropriate procedures and protocols,” Mr. Schiff told reporters on
behalf of the Democrats in the briefing. He did not take questions.
White House officials had at first arranged for only Mr. Nunes to be
briefed. But Republican Senate leaders, including Mitch McConnell of
Kentucky, the majority leader, and Richard M. Burr of North Carolina,
the Intelligence Committee chairman, pressed the White House to change
the audience to the so-called Gang of Eight, the select bipartisan group
with whom the government’s most sensitive intelligence is shared.
Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Thursday that the Gang of Eight
meeting was an “appropriate way to convey whatever information the
administration had to convey,” but he declined to critique Mr. Trump’s
charges of illegal spying.
As Mr. Trump continued to fan unsubstantiated claims that partisan
Democrats had planted a spy in his campaign, the logistics for the
meetings shifted several times.
Ultimately, Mr. Schiff was allowed to attend a morning session that had
previously been offered to just Mr. Nunes, Speaker Paul D. Ryan of
Wisconsin and another Republican congressman. The Gang of Eight met
later Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Flood’s presence at the meetings was entirely unexpected. While Mr.
Kelly helped arrange the meetings at Mr. Trump’s request, Sarah Huckabee
Sanders, the White House press secretary, had said no White House staff
members would attend. Guidance circulated by the Justice Department late
Wednesday did not include Mr. Flood among the invitees.
“For the record, the President’s Chief of Staff and his attorney in an
ongoing criminal investigation into the President’s campaign have no
business showing up to a classified intelligence briefing,” Senator Mark
Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said
on Twitter.
When Democrats confronted Mr. Flood in the Gang of Eight meeting, Mr.
Kelly intervened and dismissed their criticism, according to one of the
officials familiar with the meeting.
Democrats tried to start their own inquiry. Representative Jerrold
Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary
Committee, made a formal request for the Justice Department to
investigate the disclosure of the confidential informant’s name and
existence to the news media.
Image
Representative Devin Nunes, Republican of California and the
Intelligence Committee chairman, has been quiet about what exactly he
hopes to learn about the informant.CreditLeah Millis/Reuters
While there is no constitutional provision that says the president’s
personal lawyer cannot make a statement at a classified briefing, legal
scholars expressed misgivings.
“Even if Flood wasn’t there for any operative parts of the meeting, the
optics are disquieting,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a professor at the
University of Texas School of Law. “Rather than being sensitive to the
clear potential conflict this creates, the president is driving a truck
through the middle of it. Historically, a president would be very
careful to avoid the appearance of a conflict, as opposed to relishing
in it.”
Mr. Ryan, who has been criticized for not reining in House Republican
attacks on the Russia inquiry and federal law enforcement, defended the
unusual meetings.
Inherent in the Intelligence Committee’s work “is the responsibility to
ask tough questions of the executive branch,” he said in a statement.
“That is why we have insisted and will continue to insist on Congress’s
constitutional right to information necessary for the conduct of oversight.”
Mr. Nunes, a loyal ally of Mr. Trump who advised his presidential
transition, has been quiet about what exactly he hoped to learn about
the informant, saying only that his late-April request was part of an
oversight investigation into potential political bias and abuse of power
within the Justice Department as it relates to the Russia investigation.
It was the latest in a series of bold demands for classified documents
and testimony related to the Russia inquiry — and far from his first
open confrontation with top Republican officials in the department. And
it echoed another episode, from last spring, in which Mr. Trump falsely
claimed that President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, and Mr.
Nunes went public with information that he said showed the Obama
administration had “incidentally” collected intelligence on Trump
associates.
Democrats say that the latest episode — including the president’s
involvement — is the most recent gambit by Mr. Nunes and Mr. Trump to
undermine the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, and gain
information about his inquiry.
Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director; Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy
attorney general; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence,
along with other law enforcement and intelligence officials.
Mr. Trump continued to rail against law enforcement on Twitter on
Thursday, repeating his unsubstantiated claims. “Large dollars were paid
to the Spy, far beyond normal,” he said, without citing evidence, before
referring to the matter as “one of the biggest political scandals in
U.S. history.”
Five former top American intelligence officials who have worked for
Democratic and Republican administrations, including Leon E. Panetta and
Gen. Michael V. Hayden, warned on Wednesday that House Republicans were
putting at risk the tradition of bipartisan oversight of intelligence.
“When congressional oversight is overly partisan — or focused on
undermining important counterintelligence investigations — we worry
about inappropriate political influence on the investigators and the
erosion of a bipartisan approach to intelligence and national security,”
they wrote in an open letter.
Reporting was contributed by Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman from
New York, and Adam Goldman, Thomas Kaplan and Charlie Savage from
Washington.
Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the
Morning Briefing newsletter.
A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New
York edition with the headline: Trump Proxies Drop by Briefings on
Russia Case. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Related Coverage
F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Russia Ties to Campaign, Not to
Spy, as Trump Claims
May 18, 2018
Image
Code Name Crossfire Hurricane: The Secret Origins of the Trump Investigation
May 16, 2018
Image
Trump Repeats Unconfirmed Claims of Campaign Spying
May 23, 2018
Image
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
news
Revealing the name of a spy is not a good idea.
In fact it's called TREASON.
It's not just that you put the person's life or livelihood in danger.
It's also that you lose a valuable source of information and the enemy
can track and remove sources of valuable information.
Let me give you a couple of examples.
Oleg Penkovsky was a KGB agent who worked for the US and the British as
a double agent. It was the information that only he could provide that
helped the US know details about the Soviets putting missiles in Cuba.
He helped avoid WWIII so that JFK could force the Soviets to remove
their missiles peacefully.
Someone in US intelligence casually mentioned his name to his British
counterpart, but did not know that he was working for the KGB. The next
day the KGB arrested, tortured and killed Penkovsky.
So if there were ever any other serious crisis like the Cuban Missile
Crisis we lost our most valuable source of information.
BTW, when Penkovsky was grabbed by the KGB he blurted out the code word
to start WWIII. Luckily the CIA agent monitoring him was smart enough to
double check to see if it was real and knew it wasn't so he didn't start
WWIII.
When James Jesus Angleton was conducting his Molehunt he brought former
CIA officer John Paisley out of retirement to contact his sources in the
KGB to find out who the mole was. One night on the way back to dock his
boat he used his encrypted radio to contact an old friend who had been
his liaison to the NSA and told him that he had discovered who the mole
was and was typing up the report to hand in to Angleton the next morning.
The next morning he was found dead in the river. The KGB had
interecepted the call, shot him twice in the back of the head, then tied
diving weights around his body and threw him into the river.
Not only was it a loss of a good source, but it allowed the real mole to
continue to give our secrets to the enemy.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/29123-trump-spygate-could-be-one-of-the-biggest-political-scandals-in-history
Is that the official mouthpiece of the John Birch Society? Typical that
YOU would be the only person here to cite a source like that.
Talk about Fake News!
Loading...