Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking

[drunkenshoe]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E

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

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

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

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

An ODNI spokesman declined to comment on the issue.

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

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

The ODNI, headed by James Clapper, was established after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the recommendation of the commission that investigated the attacks. The commission, which identified major intelligence failures, recommended the office's creation to improve coordination among U.S. intelligence agencies.

In October, the U.S. government formally accused Russia of a campaign of cyber attacks against American political organizations ahead of the Nov. 8 presidential election. Democratic President Barack Obama has said he warned Russian President Vladimir Putin about consequences for the attacks.

Reports of the assessment by the CIA, which has not publicly disclosed its findings, have prompted congressional leaders to call for an investigation.

Obama last week ordered intelligence agencies to review the cyber attacks and foreign intervention in the presidential election and to deliver a report before he turns power over to Trump on Jan. 20.

The CIA assessed after the election that the attacks on political organizations were aimed at swaying the vote for Trump because the targeting of Republican organizations diminished toward the end of the summer and focused on Democratic groups, a senior U.S. official told Reuters on Friday.

Moreover, only materials filched from Democratic groups - such as emails stolen from John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman - were made public via WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, and other outlets, U.S. officials said.

"THIN REED"

The CIA conclusion was a "judgment based on the fact that Russian entities hacked both Democrats and Republicans and only the Democratic information was leaked," one of the three officials said on Monday.

"(It was) a thin reed upon which to base an analytical judgment," the official added.

Republican Senator John McCain said on Monday there was "no information" that Russian hacking of American political organizations was aimed at swaying the outcome of the election.

"It's obvious that the Russians hacked into our campaigns," McCain said. "But there is no information that they were intending to affect the outcome of our election and that's why we need a congressional investigation," he told Reuters.

McCain questioned an assertion made on Sunday by Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, tapped by Trump to be his White House chief of staff, that there were no hacks of computers belonging to Republican organizations.

"Actually, because Mr. Priebus said that doesn't mean it's true," said McCain. "We need a thorough investigation of it, whether both (Democratic and Republican organizations) were hacked into, what the Russian intentions were. We cannot draw a conclusion yet. That's why we need a thorough investigation."

In an angry letter sent to ODNI chief Clapper on Monday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said he was “dismayed” that the top U.S. intelligence official had not informed the panel of the CIA’s analysis and the difference between its judgment and the FBI’s assessment.

Noting that Clapper in November testified that intelligence agencies lacked strong evidence linking Russian cyber attacks to the WikiLeaks disclosures, Nunes asked that Clapper, together with CIA and FBI counterparts, brief the panel by Friday on the latest intelligence assessment of Russian hacking during the election campaign.

(Editing by Yara Bayoumy and Jonathan Oatis)

What is going on?!

[Nonsensei]

This is like if someone shoots another person, and the police report that while they can prove that the perpetrator aimed the gun and pulled the trigger they can't conclusively prove that the shooter meant for his victim to be hurt - they would have to be able to read the shooter's mind to determine that conclusively.

This is the bigwigs of the intelligence community giving the president elect cover by stating the obvious in a way that makes it seem like they are rejecting the CIA conclusions without actually rejecting the CIA conclusions. I wouldn;t be surprised if Trump tried to threaten their jobs in order to get them to make this completely ridiculous statement.

[drunkenshoe]

OK, correct me if I am mistaken.

There is a hacking. Two targets are attacked. These targets are the two big parties in the US which the race goes between. But, as a result only one's side's stuff is leaked in a very specific time during the election. And this is all happening during an election after 8 years of Democrat reign, just after the world has started strongly to shift to right, which even started to break the old blocs.

But it is a 'NO' because we can't prove intent?

[Nonsensei]

OK, correct me if I am mistaken.

There is a hacking. Two targets are attacked. These targets are the two big parties in the US which the race goes between. But, as a result only one's side's stuff is leaked in a very specific time during the election. And this is all happening during an election after 8 years of Democrat reign, just after the world has started strongly to shift to right, which even started to break the old blocs.

But it is a 'NO' because we can't prove intent?

That is correct.

[Baruch]

OK, correct me if I am mistaken.

There is a hacking. Two targets are attacked. These targets are the two big parties in the US which the race goes between. But, as a result only one's side's stuff is leaked in a very specific time during the election. And this is all happening during an election after 8 years of Democrat reign, just after the world has started strongly to shift to right, which even started to break the old blocs.

But it is a 'NO' because we can't prove intent?

My sources say ... insider info release, by DNC staff and NSA staff.  No hacking.  Hacking occurs continuously on the Internet, and if a state actor uses a hacking group (say Anonymous) ... there is no way to prove it, they have strong plausible deniability.  Meanwhile the content of the leaks have not been shown to be false.  It is now considered treason here, to admit to what happens in the smoke filled rooms of the powerful.  Nobody originates a hack from cia.org or kremlin.org ;-)

[drunkenshoe]

My sources say ... insider info release, by DNC staff and NSA staff.  No hacking.  Hacking occurs continuously on the Internet, and if a state actor uses a hacking group (say Anonymous) ... there is no way to prove it, they have strong plausible deniability.  Meanwhile the content of the leaks have not been shown to be false.  It is now considered treason here, to admit to what happens in the smoke filled rooms of the powerful.  Nobody originates a hack from cia.org or kremlin.org ;-)

Who are your sources? Why should I trust your sources more than a public declaration of CIA?

I am perfectly aware what you are trying to say. I am guessing most of the people here have an idea. It just not a solution. It's not an explanation. It's not an idea.

Are you sure you are aware of what is really going on? This is not just some scandal about Clinton or Russia.

You realise that the president-elect dismisses your central intelligence's allegations as if a tabloid accused him of wearing the wrong tie, right?

This^ is very familiar to me (as an act, not story). You are living through the exact thing we did. And you are talking like one of those morons who voted or supported the one here with exactly same kind of excuses and blindness.

[Baruch]

The evil US intel (see Iran) are the ones who taught the evil Turkish intel how to do this decades ago.  They are particularly famous for teaching it to Latin Americans (School of the Americas).  It is OK if they rob, rape and murder foreigners ... but not OK if they do it to their own citizens.  But in Globalism ... your own domestic population is just as ripe for colonization as Zimbabwe.

I have good sources, not Alex Jones etc.  The crazy ones they don't intend to shut down (see Fox Network), it is the ones who deliberately are accidentally tell the truth, that have to be shut down.  No authoritarian can tolerate a free press ... and since the whole world is now authoritarian, including the US ... D & R bipartisan ... there can be no free press.  NYT isn't free press, it is Pravda.

[drunkenshoe]

The evil US intel (see Iran) are the ones who taught the evil Turkish intel how to do this decades ago.  They are particularly famous for teaching it to Latin Americans (School of the Americas).  It is OK if they rob, rape and murder foreigners ... but not OK if they do it to their own citizens.  But in Globalism ... your own domestic population is just as ripe for colonization as Zimbabwe.

I have good sources, not Alex Jones etc.  The crazy ones they don't intend to shut down (see Fox Network), it is the ones who deliberately are accidentally tell the truth, that have to be shut down.  No authoritarian can tolerate a free press ... and since the whole world is now authoritarian, including the US ... D & R bipartisan ... there can be no free press.  NYT isn't free press, it is Pravda.

This is not an answer.

It's Reuters, not NYT.

And you lost your compass again.

[pr126]

https://youtu.be/Tq-P1BiHZTg

[Baruch]

Here is one of my sources ... DailyKos aka D-Central Committee ... they allow no cartoon not approved by the Presidium

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/14/1610598/-Cartoon-How-Putin-hacked-2016

My other sources I should tell you?  Bwahaha ... you only seem to be a follower of Habermas ... your US code name, as a mole here, is DeepFriedTurkey.  DeepFriedTurkey is a WMD, mostly destructive to "at home" self fryers who mishandle the process ;-(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gn895y4wkc

[Baruch]

https://youtu.be/Tq-P1BiHZTg

PussyRiot would never work for Vlad ;-)

[GrinningYMIR]

everyone's high in 2016.

[pr126]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbTNGN6ikb0

[drunkenshoe]

Here is one of my sources ... DailyKos aka D-Central Committee ... they allow no cartoon not approved by the Presidium

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/14/1610598/-Cartoon-How-Putin-hacked-2016

My other sources I should tell you?  Bwahaha ... you only seem to be a follower of Habermas ... your US code name, as a mole here, is DeepFriedTurkey.  DeepFriedTurkey is a WMD, mostly destructive to "at home" self fryers who mishandle the process ;-(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gn895y4wkc

Is this supposed to be some sort of an insult? Myeh,lol. You can't even insult properly, Baruch.   

[Baruch]

No insult ... just gallows humor for someone under an oppressive regime (both of us, it was the US looking for non-existent WMD, or was it WMD that the US supplied to the Syrian rebels, or was that Turkey who supplied the Sarin?).  It was self-deprecating on me .. if you know DailyKos.  You do analyze too much, and wrongly.