Why are our intelligence agencies actually saying our election was hacked?

a reply to: DJW001

They could have leaked them earlier ... or later, timing is not important, it is the content that matters.
And the content is preecisely what you fail to consider.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

And the content is preecisely what you fail to consider.

On the contrary. It is precisely the content that makes the timing relevant.

a reply to: DJW001

Is it well time from Project Veritas to release their 'CNN is pushing the artificial Russian craze video' two days before CNN was about to air 'The Russian Connection' : their homebrew compilation of anti-Russian non-sense ?

You have interest and everything that contradicts them is considered as a grand conspiracy ... how convenient.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
I'll just leave this here for those who say it was all CNN and it's fake....

www.dni.gov...

PDF file.

From your source article:

Determining Attribution in Cyber Incidents The nature of cyberspace makes attribution of cyber operations difficult but not impossible. Every kind of cyber operation—malicious or not—leaves a trail. US Intelligence Community analysts use this information, their constantly growing knowledge base of previous events and known malicious actors, and their knowledge of how these malicious actors work and the tools that they use, to attempt to trace these operations back to their source.

Can that trail not be duplicated to digitally frame someone so to speak? That would certainly seem to be within the realm and skill set of the NSA and/or CIA. I mean even any of the Antivirus companies would be able to digitally re-produce the fingerprint, or else how would they be able to scan and identify them?

Ironically, our own intelligence agencies do this same type of stuff as evidenced by Snowden, etc., yet we bitch and moan when the tables are turned. I even recall a history channel show where we had a special submarine that tapped into transatlantic cables and captured voice and data.

Unfortunately, most society has been trained into blindly believing whoever the current Enemy of the State is portrayed to be...

a reply to: Sillyolme

That happened. It's real and they will do it again because the idiot in charge keeps telling his base that it's not true. He gets the Intel. He is conveniently ignoring it. Because he's afraid. He's afraid that it will deligitimized his presidency. That's the bottom line he and his supporters few as they are now are convinced this is just a ruse by the left to get him out of office.

Except Trump said back in January that Russia was trying to meddle in the election.
From a source you might even watch silly.


Next lie?

a reply to: xstealth


Now trumps bodyguard is in the spotlight. Why would intel want to interview him? Yeah, how anyone can deny there is an Russia investigation is just ignorant. They do not see what is right there in front of them, and its NOT just on CNN. Please!



www.yahoo.com...

Hillary's servers may have been hacked, but the DNC leaks did not come from her server.
Her server was specifically setup to control pay for play and the State Dept infusion to the Clinton Foundation
They did not want to hand the server over for forensics because then all the dirty corruption would have been discovered.

Its why she wiped her phones and laptops.
Its why the backup retention time was changed so the backups were lost.

No one could find out what she was doing on those servers because it would have been cold hard proof of her treason and corruption and many... many many many people around her would have gone down with her

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: ItCameFromOuterSpace

What has been proven time after time to be false?
That Russia hacked the DNC?
That has never been proven false.
That happened. It's real and they will do it again because the idiot in charge keeps telling his base that it's not true.

It has never been proven true, that's what this thread is about. How can a server that's never been investigated be used as evidence?

The government wrote " In July 2015, Russian
intelligence gained access to Democratic National
Committee (DNC) networks and maintained that
access until at least June 2016. " - yet they never once examined that server to prove that point, that point was given to them by a private company hired by the DNC.

That's what this thread is about; so stop going on about Russia hacking a server and go on to how the government has a right to claim that this server was hacked.

a reply to: xstealth

Just bc it has not been proven true yet does not mean it has been proven over and over and over to be false and it also does not mean that it IS false.

There is just no definite proof...yet. Too much speculation to NOT investigate...

smarten up...take note of the speculations instead of what you want to hear.

Dont listen to our lying president when he says "fake news". That is a deflection tactic to try and control his weak followers.

a reply to: Sillyolme

You hate Trump, comes through loud and clear. That doesnt make the FBI credible.

a reply to: TonyS

and just bc trump tweets and rages on about "FAKE NEWS" doesnt mean the news is all fake.

However, it does say alot about trump that he rages on about it, that im sure is lost to all trump supporters.

also, just bc you are a trumpluvr doesnt mean the FBI is NOT credible.

a reply to: veracity

Excuse me, but I am no Trump lover. I simply see him as a lesser evil than any Democrat out there.

a reply to: xstealth

I think it was a state level attack. I dont think Russia did it. If anything they were made to look culpable.

Whether it was elements of our own state or not, official, rogue, or contracted remains to be seen.

Also, CNN is retarded.

a reply to: TonyS


Uh, wait, trump is more credible than the FBI??? Hardly!!! trump U alone shows just how credible trump is!!!

a reply to: xstealth

But the intelligence community actually never said Russia hacked our election.

It has only been James Clapper & James Comey that have made these claims publically.

Both of them are liars and both of them are leakers. No one from the IC has come forward to corroborate their claims.

It's one big smoke and mirrors magic trick, and the general public are being duped.

a reply to: kurthall

I never said that. I just don't ascribe any credibility to the FBI. I don't know why anyone would. The FBI doesn't owe the US public anything, including the truth.

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: xstealth

Just bc it has not been proven true yet does not mean it has been proven over and over and over to be false and it also does not mean that it IS false.

There is just no definite proof...yet. Too much speculation to NOT investigate...

smarten up...take note of the speculations instead of what you want to hear.

Dont listen to our lying president when he says "fake news". That is a deflection tactic to try and control his weak followers.

You could be in the human trafficking business.

No no, it hasn't been proven YET, but it doesn't mean it is False.

But I think it's too important of an issue NOT to investigate.

We won't listen to you when you say "that's an absolute lie" - that is a deflection tactic to try to control those who are speculative of your actions...


This kind of attitude sets a dangerous precedent for future elections, our justice system, and our democracy.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

But the intelligence community actually never said Russia hacked our election.

The intelligence community has never said that the Russian hacking affected the election results. Big difference. In addition to their fake news, propaganda, troll army, and hacking of, at the very least, Podesta's emails and several state voter databases, Russia continues to wage "information war" against the United States. They have long exploited our freedom of expression in this way. There are now some who seem to want to eliminate our First Amendment rights. Ironically, this is the last thing Russia wants!

It has only been James Clapper & James Comey that have made these claims publically.

James Clapper was the Director of National Intelligence. He was the head of "all seventeen" agencies, and spoke for them. James Comey was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which, for better or worse, is our principle counter-espionage agency. He would know. Trump fired him for placing honesty above loyalty, which has landed Trump in a world of pain.

Both of them are liars and both of them are leakers.

If they are leakers, they are telling the truth. Which are they? Liars or leakers?

No one from the IC has come forward to corroborate their claims.

Why should they? They work with classified information. It is up to the DNI, at that time Clapper, to speak for them. What is most significant is that no credible member of the intelligence community has yet come forward to dispute the conclusion.

a reply to: xstealth

I mean, it should be pretty obvious that it is a lie.

The lie originated from the Clinton campaign, and it serves as justification for the opposition.

She couldn't justify having her constituents riot in the streets for her unless they all believed that Trump cheated.

She knows the Wikileaks originated from someone in the DNC that turned to whistleblowing.

And how the DNC is facing a class action lawsuit for rigging the primaries.

If you want to waste your tax dollars on a phony investigation that's your business.

a reply to: xstealth

That is a completely disingenuous argument. If someone parades around with prostitutes on their arm, you might suspect that they are a human trafficker. An investigation would be required to determine if there is sufficient evidence to build a case in court. Trump has at least three prostitutes in his entourage: Manafort, Flynn, and Page, with at least another four waiting in the wings. If everything is above board, Trump has nothing to worry about, right?