CIA: Russia's leaked Clinton e-mails to help Trump to win

[drunkenshoe]

OK from Washington Post to NY Times, Reuters, TheGuardian, CNN to ABC, the media is reporting that CIA reported that Russia's goal in leaking Clinton's e-mails was actively helping Trump to win the elections. So according to CIA, Russian hackers actually hacked both sides, but only leaked Clinton's to damage democrats. E-mail scandal was the biggest excuse shown to vote for Trump in some groups if I am not mistaken.

What's your take on this? Pushing for electoral college not to vote for him? Do you think this is real?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/opinion/russias-hand-in-americas-election.html?_r=0

It’s not hard to see why Russia would have been tempted to tip the scales in America’s presidential election. American defense officials have been warning about Russia’s capabilities and dangerous intentions, calling Moscow the gravest threat to the United States.

Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, made it clear her administration would redouble efforts to punish and isolate Moscow for war crimes in Syria’s civil war and its aggression toward Ukraine and other neighbors. “I’ve stood up to Russia,” Ms. Clinton said during a debate in the fall. “I’ve taken Putin on and I would do that as president.”

In Mr. Trump, the Russians had reason to see a malleable political novice, one who had surrounded himself with Kremlin lackeys. Mr. Trump bragged that the Russian president had once called him “brilliant.” In July, Mr. Trump said he hoped Russia would hack and divulge more of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, an astonishing invitation to a foreign power that appeared already to be meddling in an American election.

In recent days, the scope and intent of Russia’s suspected involvement in the election has come into sharper focus. New disclosures by American officials now reveal that intelligence agencies concluded with “high confidence” that a desire to undermine American faith in the electoral system morphed into an effort to hurt Mrs. Clinton’s chances. One critical piece of evidence for this assessment was that suspected Russian hackers broke into the computer networks of both the Republican and Democratic national committees, but only leaked damaging emails from the latter.

At the urging of Democratic lawmakers, President Obama has asked the director of national intelligence to conduct a “full review” of Russia’s hidden hand in the election, the White House announced Friday. The inquiry, which is to be completed before Mr. Trump is sworn in on Jan. 20, is an important, if belated, step.

Weeks before the election, Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, expressed skepticism about the intelligence reports and warned the White House that publicizing them would amount to a partisan act. The Republicans, however, did not protest when James Comey, the F.B.I. director, disclosed in a letter to Congress that a stash of emails found on Anthony Weiner’s computer appeared relevant to the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server. By the time Mr. Comey said there was nothing new, the innuendo bomb against Mrs. Clinton had exploded and the damage was done.

In a Fox News interview on Sunday, Mr. Trump dismissed the intelligence assessment about Russian meddling with contempt, and accused Democrats of “putting it out because they suffered one of the greatest defeats in the history of politics in this country.”

Some Republican lawmakers recognize the importance of standing up to Russia and taking steps to restore faith in the electoral system and institutions. A bipartisan group, led by Senator John McCain, a Republican, pledged Sunday to get to the bottom of Russia’s role, noting that the possibility that Moscow shaped the outcome of America’s election ought to alarm every American. “This cannot become a partisan issue,” said the statement, which was also supported by Senator Charles Schumer, the incoming leader of the Senate Democrats. Among the unanswered questions is whether anyone within Mr. Trump’s inner circle coordinated with the Kremlin and whether Moscow spread fake news to hurt Mrs. Clinton.

Revelations about Russian involvement will loom over many of Mr. Trump’s decisions, including his likely choice to lead the State Department, Rex Tillerson. Mr. Tillerson, the chief executive of Exxon Mobil, has cultivated a close and profitable relationship with Mr. Putin and has criticized American sanctions against Russia.

Mr. Trump should be leading the call for a thorough investigation, since it would be the only way to remove this darkening cloud from his presidency. Failing to resolve the questions about Russia would feed suspicion among millions of Americans that a dominant theme of his candidacy turned out to be true: The election was indeed rigged.

http://www.refinery29.com/2016/12/132617/russia-hacking-election-what-to-know#slide

A month after Donald Trump won the 2016 election, the CIA has concluded that Russia wanted to help him win the presidency.

According to a Washington Post report on December 9, a secret assessment from the CIA found that President Vladimir Putin wasn't just trying to undermine the U.S. election, but leave his mark on it. It was the first time that the agency said Russia was specifically trying to sway the outcome of this election to a specific candidate.

The CIA gave its latest evaluation to "key senators" in a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill. The Washington Post reported that briefers told senators that it was now “quite clear” that Russia’s goal in leaking emails from Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Convention, and those in her campaign, was to get Trump elected. This information comes from officials who spoke to the paper on the condition of anonymity.

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” a senior U.S. official told the Washington Post. “That’s the consensus view."

The New York Times reported that the CIA based its conclusion on the Russia hacking, in part, on the fact that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee, but didn't release any information or emails. According to the paper, the agency had "high confidence" that the RNC had been hacked, despite previous reports that it hadn't.

Sean Spicer, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, tweeted, "The RNC was not 'hacked.' The @nytimes was told and chose to ignore. Exhibit #1 in the fake news." Trump's chief of staff, Reince Priebus, also refuted this report on Meet The Press, saying, the "RNC was absolutely not hacked." He claims that the FBI was called in after the DNC hack and found no evidence of hacking in the RNC's computer system.

It should be noted that the CIA presentation on Russia's influence of the election did fall short of a formal U.S. assessment, which would include all 17 intelligence agencies. It was also reported by a senior official in attendance that there were "minor disagreements" among the intelligence officials due to the fact that there are still questions that need to be answered.

For now, here is what we do know.

[AllRight]

I think it's real. I've said since election day that our system was hacked by the Russians to favor DT. Will anything be done about it? Probably not and that is real frightening to me.

[pr126]

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/12/fake_news_the_cia_says_russia_preferred_trump.html

If it's true that the CIA concluded that Russia deliberately intervened in November's election to tilt it toward Donald Trump, that ought to worry Americans, but not because Trump is a Russian mole or Vladimir Putin's agents stuffed electronic ballot boxes.  Rather, it is cause for concern that American intelligence analysts are either not very bright or politically corrupted enough to really believe such poppycock.  Meanwhile, the Post and much of the mainstream media, in their mania to discredit Trump, will publish almost any sort of "news" nowadays, even if it's as fake as the nonsense that makes up much of the blogosphere.

[Baruch]

Germany is catching up ... they are now saying there that "the evil Russians" are destroying Germany from within, using fluoride no less!

The Red Scare is real, and the coup de etat is not speculation.  The CIA and FBI have been at war since WW II (when OSS created as predecessor to CIA).  Who wins?  Depends on if the DoD stays on the sideline, or the US goes full Banana Republic.  Since I work for DoD .. this is very live for me.  Sour grapes can lead to insurrection by the Right or worse.  If the DoD backs the CIA, then the FBI will be ... sidelined.  Or vice versa.  In any case we are now open to assassination, civil war and dictatorship ... because people don't play fair when trillions of dollars are at risk.  It was the NY FBI office that pushed for the Comey revelation just before the election.  The CIA controls our domestic drug traffic for decades.

I sympathize with the Russians (particularly in Syria and Ukraine) and like Putin.  The war party (Graham and McCain) are hell bent on starting WW III to implement Agenda 21 (aka Club of Rome).

This is very real ... will there even be a US on Jan 20?  Will Obama institute a state of emergency, and become dictator?  The Dems can't allow the Constitution to operate ... by allowing an uncompromised EC to meet on Dec 19 ... or by allowing the House to decide (as is right, not the SCOTUS).  Unless of course they have already decided that McCain is our new President (because he is war party).  Conservatives are both armed, and already have a new constitution planned, or to simply break up the US by peacefully ending the Federal government.

Don't pay attention to the usual MSM suspects ... they are CIA.  Alt-media is the only place to get real reporting ... all else is Pravda.  What Pravda wants is full on censorship of all media, aka China.

Information outside of the MSM, says that the DNC was an inside operation, and that the person responsible, may have already been eliminated (a Snowden type).  The release of the Pedesta emails can take down the entire Dem leadership, as well as some of the Rep leadership ... as part of a worldwide pedophilia ring (this is more speculative) that is lead by Epstein and involved British royal family.  And there is that Anthony Weiner laptop ;-((

What is rich, is that the Clinton Foundation taking millions in bribes from Qatar, Saudi, Norway, Australia etc ... isn't illegal foreign influence.  The whole thing is so hypocritical, it simply is the Corleones against the other mob families.  We are going back to Packard touring cars with Thompson sub-machine guns pointing out the windows, to control the drug traffic (the Internet being the most important drug, even more than TV).

[Youssuf Ramadan]

Either way, it makes the US establishment look weak and stupid.

[Nonsensei]

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/12/fake_news_the_cia_says_russia_preferred_trump.html

Ah so it's fake because some guy at americanthinker says so. Brilliant.

[Nonsensei]

Either way, it makes the US establishment look weak and stupid.

No friend it's the American people looking weak and stupid right now. Even if thete were a video shot by the Russians documenting the hack step by step and including an interview with putin clearly spelling out Russian intent to tamper in an American election and people would still refuse to believe any of it because nobody has any grasp on what is real anymore.

[pr126]

Ah so it's fake because some guy at americanthinker says so. Brilliant.

It is inconceivable that a mainstream media outlet would publish lies, half truths, fake news or omit information from the public? Or have a political agenda?

You are conditioned to avoid certain publications, blogs, certain TV channels, books to reject information not approved by the leftist ideology.

Welcome to the Ministry of Truth. 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint.

[TomFoolery]

I'm not saying the CIA is a saintly organization or that the mainstream media gets everything correct all the time, but the CIA's revelation is far from the only solid claim that Russia has interfered. This has been ongoing since the DNC hack occurred. Three independent cybersecurity firms agree:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/31/what-we-know-about-russias-role-dnc-email-leak/

Let's not forget that Richard Nixon resigned for less with Watergate, but somehow Trump remains untouchable. I don't fucking get it. Whether or not Trump asked for Russia's help or whether these leaks actually helped Trump win the election remains to be seen,
but the fact that he was goading Russia on during the elections speaks volumes about the kind of man and American he is. I think the Trump party's casual dismissal of the claims is terrifying.

He's basically discrediting the CIA by suggesting that because the CIA was wrong about WMD in Iraq, therefore nothing they say is of any value. But somehow Trump should be trusted? He's the one who said "no" to a blind trust for his offshore business holdings in order to avoid a conflict of interest, so what will happen when he receives intelligence that should make him take security actions that conflict with his business dealings overseas?

[pr126]

Lucky there was no foul play when Obama was elected (or selected?). Twice.

[SGOS]

It is inconceivable that a mainstream media outlet would publish lies, half truths, fake news or omit information from the public? Or have a political agenda?

I get the sarcasm, and I even agree with your point, but I think it's equally inconceivable when the government can assure us that there is no way for our votes to be tampered with, especially when using electronic devices.  Now it appears that the government is saying the opposite, and they can be tampered with.  It's inconceivable that mutually exclusive scenarios can both be true.

No politician tells the truth.  The government is a collection of politicians.  You can't put a bunch of politicians that don't tell the truth in charge of a country and expect a collective truth to magically emerge.  I don't know if Trump actually won the electoral college or not.  I'd think the same if Clinton won.  In the end, what people believe to be true is irrelevant.  Because we are bombarded with truths and untruths from the government and its propaganda outlets in the media.  There is no reliable source of disclosure for us to even know the truth.

[pr126]

I get the sarcasm, and I even agree with your point, but I think it's equally inconceivable when the government can assure us that there is no way for our votes to be tampered with, especially when using electronic devices.  Now it appears that the government is saying the opposite, and they can be tampered with.  It's inconceivable that mutually exclusive scenarios can both be true.

No politician tells the truth.  The government is a collection of politicians.  You can't put a bunch of politicians that don't tell the truth in charge of a country and expect a collective truth to magically emerge.  I don't know if Trump actually won the electoral college or not.  I'd think the same if Clinton won.  In the end, what people believe to be true is irrelevant.  Because we are bombarded with truths and untruths from the government and its propaganda outlets in the media.  There is no reliable source of disclosure for us to even know the truth.

I believe that Trump is not a plitician, but a succesful business man. That may be to the USA advantage.
I would give him the benefit of the doubt.

But the left is a sore loser. They are doing everything to throw the spanner in theworks.
Still 38 days left before inaguration.

[Hydra009]

I don't know if Trump actually won the electoral college or not.

Well, they counted the votes and the results are pretty conclusive.  Absent any evidence that the elections were fraudulent, I think we have to accept the results as genuine.

In the end, what people believe to be true is irrelevant.  Because we are bombarded with truths and untruths from the government and its propaganda outlets in the media.  There is no reliable source of disclosure for us to even know the truth.

Not all sources are created equal.  Alex Jones isn't as credible as Dan Rather, nor are Pr126's right-wing conspiracy-mongers compared to virtually anyone else.

[Nonsensei]

It is inconceivable that a mainstream media outlet would publish lies, half truths, fake news or omit information from the public? Or have a political agenda?

You are conditioned to avoid certain publications, blogs, certain TV channels, books to reject information not approved by the leftist ideology.

Welcome to the Ministry of Truth. 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint.

I am conditioned to avoid "news" sources that reject the findings of the central intelligence agency as "poppycock" just because those findings make their president-elect look like he got the election handed to him by Moscow.

Don't talk to me about conditioning, pr. The only one here willing to believe assertions without evidence is you. If this twit at americanthinke can provide evidence to back his claims up then ill listen. But he wont. That isnt what americanthinker is about. American thinker is not written for me. Its witten for people who have confirmation bias to such a degree that it has become a disability.

[Hydra009]

No friend it's the American people looking weak and stupid right now. Even if there was a video shot by the Russians documenting the hack step by step and including an interview with putin clearly spelling out Russian intent to tamper in an American election and people would still refuse to believe any of it because nobody has any grasp on what is real anymore.

Exactly.

And it's not like the US has been Russia's only target.  Germany has also accused Russia of launching a disinformation campaign designed to manipulate its elections.