It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Has anyone actually bothered to read the IC Russian 'Hacking' Assessment?

page: 2
113
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1


I'm not sure he needs to inject any more funding into it, apparently our media and other intelligence agencies are at a loss ....




posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   
In July the FBI said this:


The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server found no evidence that her communications were hacked while she was secretary of state, but it...was “possible” that they accessed her account, he said. But “given the nature of the system and the actors potentially involved, we assess we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.


after admitting that it is unlikely that they would actually be able to find or see any direct evidence of a hack, 4 months later they say this:


FBI Now 99% Certain at Least 5 Foreign Agencies Hacked Into Hillary’s Server


as for the DNC the FBI never even actually physically examined the server, they never even physically saw it.

They admit that it`s unlikely that they would be able to find or detect any direct evidence on a server that they DID physically examine, but they are highly confident of their assessment of a server which they DID NOT physically examine.

in this report basically what they are saying is "we don`t have any evidence,circumstantial or otherwise they we can show you, but we know the Russians and other countries are always trying hack things in America so the Russians probably did it, trust us"

just more of the Iraq has WMD lies.

J Edgar Hoover would be so disappointed with the political hacks who are running the FBI now.

edit on 7-1-2017 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

Let's also not forget these threads:

NSA Whistleblower just shredded Obama's 'Russian Hacker' narrative

And:

FBI never *actually* examined the Democrat National Committee computer system first hand

The NSA's luke-warn assessment of the current report starts to make more and more sense.


edit on 7-1-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   
I thought it wasn't going to be declassified and available to the general public until next week.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I thought it wasn't going to be declassified and available to the general public until next week.


Think again.




posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

I read through it this morning. It did sound like an ATS thread lol. The part about RT... huh?... what was that doing in there? Sure Russia tried to influence the election, but judging from the popular vote numbers, they didn't succeed lol. What disturbed me the most was Trump's reaction to it, because the voting machines weren't the issue. He was just blathering.

What Putin thinks he did was get Trump elected, but all he did was put a bullet in a dying animal:

Putin didn’t undermine the election. We did.
edit on 7-1-2017 by desert because: sp & punc



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Don't be absurd.
Almost everyone is sure it was the Russians. Including Lord trump.
There are some diehards but there always are
edit on 172017 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

You can access the report here

Read the US Intelligence Report on Russian Hacking



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: loam

Don't be absurd.
Almost everyone is sure it was the Russians. Including Lord trump.
There are some diehards but there always are



What was the Russians?



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   
The fake news putting out new fake news at the request of a covert bunch that has their own agenda that they will not admit to


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: loam

Don't be absurd.
Almost everyone is sure it was the Russians. Including Lord trump.
There are some diehards but there always are


Only two possibilities:

1) you didn't read the thread; or
2) you refuse to believe the words of the actual report.



... it was the Russians.


BTW, what did they precisely do in your view?

The report explicitly says they didn't hack the actual voting.

The report explicitly says they didn't alter any of the leaked emails.

The report explicitly says they didn't make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.



edit on 7-1-2017 by loam because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   
I read it, it's pure speculation. They never included method of attack, the exploit used to compromise the server, how they got in, nothing.

It's pure and utter propaganda, the pure definition of it! If this is the best they got, then Trump is right.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
The next excuse we will hear is that the "classified" version of the report was "classified at the time", and therefore they can't retroactively "re-classify any portions as classified".






posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus


after admitting that it is unlikely that they would actually be able to find or see any direct evidence of a hack, 4 months later they say this:


That's a nope. That was a bulls# "rumor" (or out and out lie) Bret Baier tried to push election week. Picked up by the likes of Jim Hoft (The Gateway Pundit), IWB and Pamela Gellar. Baier's likely sources were Giuliani and Kallstrom. He walked back part of the same report within 24 hours. He didn't bother to clean up the rest of his mess.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Yea, they determined that server was most likely hacked by four actors, state or otherwise. So why are we dead set it was the Russians.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: loam

Don't be absurd.
Almost everyone is sure it was the Russians. Including Lord trump.
There are some diehards but there always are



What was the Russians?




They turned snow into wine...true story



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

That's the thing that people will miss, our own, domestic, homegrown "bulls# "rumor" (or out and out lie)". Did Putin attempt to influence a United States election? Yes. But it wasn't through manipulating voting machines. It was cyber propaganda based, but what he offered as propaganda was merely a wave in the tsunami of our own weak intelligence, and I don't mean any agencies. As they have done for decades, Russia probed for weakness and found it, our own homegrown "bulls# "rumor" (or out and out lie)" and political dysfunction.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:37 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Yes. I read it this morning.

Rather than rant to my best friend for an hour about it, I decided to distill the key points of what I was thinking into an image. I'm sure he was grateful to be spared.



RC



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Russian media is allowed to make stuff up just like CNN does. What is the problem? Hillary is all about globalism so what Russians can't have an opinion?


LOL I guess we would start WW3 if Putin just blatantly said If I was voting I would not vote for Hillary lol.
edit on 7-1-2017 by Xeven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   
FLat out, bottom line, all i need to know: the CIA screwed up the intel so badly with Iraq that it led us into a war that we still have to deal with 15 years later. In the intervening years, the CIA has done nothing at all to redeem itself in my opinion, and has actually conducted itself in a way that I find atrocious and reprehensible.

So with this in mind, the CIA's assessment of any situation, in particular situations in which war with another nation would be a logical conclusion, is completely worthless.

The more we review the work the CIA has done, the more we realize that the 21st century is simply a product o their propaganda.




top topics



 
113
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join