Slashdot Mirror
US Releases Declassified Report On Russian Hacking, Concludes That Putin 'Developed a Clear Preference' For Trump (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has released its unclassified report on Russian hacking operations in the United States. "We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election," according to the report. "Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. 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." The report, titled "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections," details the successful hack of the Democratic National Committee. "The Kremlin's campaign aimed at the U.S. election featured disclosures of data obtained through Russian cyber operations; intrusions into U.S. state and local electoral boards; and overt propaganda," according to the report. The report states that Russian intelligence services made cyber-attacks against "both major U.S. political parties" to influence the 2016 election. The report also publicly names Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks.com, two sources of stolen information released to the public, as Russian operatives working on behalf of the country's military intelligence unit, the GRU. Officials from the organization were recently the target of U.S. sanctions. WikiLeaks is also cited as a recipient of stolen information. The report also notes that the U.S. has determined Russia "accessed elements of multiple state or local electoral boards," though no vote-tallying processes were tampered with. The FBI and CIA have "high confidence" the election tampering was ordered by Putin to help then-candidate Trump, according to the report. NSA has "moderate confidence" in the assessment.
bongey writes: The declassified DNI report offers no direct evidence of Russia hacking DNC or Podesta emails. Exactly half of the report (subtract blank and TOC) 9 of 18 is just devoted to going after RT.com by claiming they have close ties to Russia and therefore a propaganda arm, trying to imply that rt.com is related to the hacking. "Many of the key judgments in this assessment rely on a body of reporting from multiple sources that are consistent with our understanding of Russian behavior. Insights into Russian efforts -- including specific cyber operations -- and Russian views of key U.S. players derive from multiple corroborating sources. Some of our judgments about Kremlin preferences and intent are drawn from the behavior of Kremlin loyal political figures, state media, and pro-Kremlin social media actors, all of whom the Kremlin either directly uses to convey messages or who are answerable to the Kremlin."
UPDATE 1/6/17: President-elect Donald Trump met with U.S. intelligence officials Friday, calling the meeting "constructive" and offering praise for intel officials. "While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election, including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines," Trump said in a statement after the meeting.
'Developed a Clear Preference' For Trump? Wow, I never thought the US people and Putin could have so much in common.
TL;DR:
- Russia wanted the candidate who didn't want to start WW3 to win
- The wikileaks emails were all real
- Russia didn't hack the election
- The Russian propaganda network dispensed Russian propaganda
I seem to remember the Obama administration had a preference against Brexit and Netin-yahoo...
Was there ever evidence that Russia was the Wikileaks source? Julian Assange has certainly denied it and implied not too subtly that it may have been a certain murdered DNC staffer named Seth Rich. Regardless if it was him or not Julian Assange has stated unequivocally that the source was a DNC staffer.
. . . there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines. . .
Why bother with the voting machines when you can tamper with the voters?
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
No, Assange has simply claimed it wasn't Russia (why anyone would believe Assange is beyond me, even if he was in a position to know that all the intermedaries weren't Russians). People like you keep trying to make Rich into some sort of victim of the Clinton Crime FAmily. It's a deep irony that you'll reject multiple US security services' claims that Russia was the source, but buy into a completely unevidenced and really quite idiotic conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton had a DNC staffer murdered. And for what? So that voting for Trump doesn't make you a fucking moron? Well, too bad, you're a fucking moron.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Putin dislikes Clinton for one reason (imo):
No one in the world has more influence in the Balkans and Ukraine than Bill Clinton. Not only did he win a war there, he has deep understanding of the region (even knowing who some of the crime lords are), and has personal relationships with many people there. Apart from Lewinsky, he was an excellent president and he managed to settle a complex region that could have ended up like Iraq is now, if someone less competent had been in charge.
However, Putin has a goal to increase his influence in the exact same region. The biggest impediment to reaching that goal would be Bill/Hillary in power again.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Let's compare/contrast the historical veracity of information released by Assange/WikiLeaks with that of any US intelligence service, shall we?
One has an impeccable record of authenticity, while the other is run by documented liars. In fact, both Brennan and Clapper sat before Congress and bald-faced LIED when asked about the existence and activities of the NSA's domestic spying apparatus.
The better question would be: Why would anyone in their right mind not believe Assange over the Liar McPantsonFires in Washington DC?
"While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election, including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines," Trump said in a statement after the meeting.
OMG! That seems like an actual, complete sentence with a coherent message from Trump!
I think Donald Trump did the best job, he did a tremendous job downplaying cyber and all this democracy thing, better than anyone else.
Why would anyone believe Clapper, who has been cought at lying under oath before the congress before?
Just a reminder that the US government are proven liars. They lied all through the 1950s about the Middle East and Iran, They lied their arses about Vietnam. They lied about not supporting South American dictators. They lied about the Contras. And when came to WMD they even lied to themselves and then fabricated evidence to prove their own BS. Up until 1973, when they were found out, they even paid reporters at the New York Times and Washington Post to print fake news. This is an incredible but true fact. Well documented. It's amazing stuff. And they always get away with it. Heck, go back to the 1800s, the Philippine war or the Spanish-America war. They were even printing fake news back then. It never ends.
On the one hand: Yes they should have secured their machines and not put morons who would fall for simple phishing tricks in charge.
On the other hand: Whoever released the DNC/Podesta emails did us all a huge favor. We shouldn't care all that much who did it. We particularly shouldn't care about the fact free allegations being made by the crooks who were exposed and lost.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Not to mention that Hillary Clinton used the CIA to influence the 2011 Russian elections against Putin's party. This is just payback in kind.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
How does what Russia is accused of differ from the Obama administration influencing the Israeli presidential election by giving over $300k to groups acting against Netanyahu?
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
When did Obama or Clinton become tech wizards?
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Clinton an excellent president? You mean the DINO (Democrat In Name Only) who dismantled the New Deal protections (see Glass-Steagall) that could have prevented the financial meltdown? What f*ing planet are you living on?
Or the same president who was too chickenshit to allow gay marriage, instead passing the unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act? The same guy who claimed he didn't inhale (what was he smoking to even think anyone would believe that?). And let's not forget Don't Ask Don't Tell.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Would be Obama/Clinton, given the number of "red lines" enacted and withdrawn.
Assad crossed the "red line" when Hillary was no longer SOS. So it was Obama/Kerry not Obama/Clinton. Hillary has said she would have been more aggressive in Syria.
Personal opinion: Obama made the right choice. Bombing would have accomplished nothing. So instead we demanded that Assad destroy his entire stockpile of chemical weapons, and then we verified that he did it. That was an accomplishment.
More personal opinion: We are backing the wrong side in Syria. Assad is preferable to the opposition in almost every way. We don't need to oppose him just because the Russians support him.
California suffers from numerous problems. 1. Illegal voters 2. Voter intimidation 3. Voter depression
Also,
4. Voter suppression
5. Voter aggression
6. Vote anticipation
7. Voter aggravation
8. Voter illustration
9. Voter constipation
10. Voter elaboration
11. Voter absolution
12. Voter abstraction
13. Voter inauguration
12. Voter incineration
13. Voter alliteration
Yes I threw awa my mod points to post this stupid comment.
especially without qualification.
I might believe this report over Assange because he had a very clear motive to make sure Hilary Clinton didn't get elected. Her dislike for him (and Snowden) was well documented).
And you'd be a fool if you didn't believe Russia preferred Trump over Hilary. Trump has been pro-Russia all along and has millions (billions?) to gain from his business interests by supporting them. The real question is, do American interests align with Russia. If the answer is yes, by all means, believe Trump and his ilk. Otherwise, well, Houston, we have a problem...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Like it or not, the perception of the incoming president as Putin's lapdog is going to stick. You cannot wipe off the stink at this point. In the history books, Donald J Trump is going to have an asterisk after his name, and the image of #RussianDon cuddling up to Vladimir Putin is forever.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The NSA said it has moderate confidence or about 50% that it was the Russians. So for nearly the same probability of flipping a coin, 35 diplomats were kicked out and 2 Russian sites that have been open since the 1970s were closed down.
The NSA opinion holds vastly more weight related to hacking because the NSA are the hacking experts, the FBI/CIA are doing political guessing.
The FBI changed there opinion on the CIAs information. Considering the former CIA head came out for Clinton and the current head John Brennan spoke out against Trump. Both the CIA/FBI ended with highly confident, sure not political at all, wink, wink.
I will trust the NSA over the CIA/FBI.
Can't speak for the Balkans, but that is certainly not true about Ukraine. McCain has influence there — he knows Russians since his youth. Biden does — his son has sizeable investments there. Obama and Trump do — for their own obvious reasons.
But Clinton?..
The difference with Iraq may be more due to differences between Iraqis and Yugoslavs — and their respective neighborhoods — than that between Bush and Clinton.
Really? You mean, the Hillary of the "Reset" fame? The Hillary, that was on his payroll for years? The Hillary, whose e-mails his staff has been accessing more reliably, than weather forecasts? That Hillary?..
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
We want a decades long, bloody stalemate between Sunni/Shia. Keep them busy and out of trouble.
Wars don't reduce trouble. They create radicalized and desperate people. Syrian refugees are destabilizing the EU, and many of the recent terrorist attacks in France, Germany, and Turkey can be traced back to Syria.
Fuck you! I'm from the Balkans and US involvement only made things worse. Facts were turned upside down, people were killed and their rapists and torturers were praised and supported by US. You are right about Bill knowing the crime lords there, he and CIA created most of them to benefit from smuggling and other illegal activities. Do die in a ditch you piece of shit, you don't know what you are talking about!
That's fucking horrible. Perhaps thinking that makes you feel smart as if you were Sun Tzu or were playing a game of Sid Meier's Civilization, but there are actual people living there. This sounds like ramblings of a jerky hand lunatic Hitler waiting it out in the bunker.
What would you rather like (assuming in the US) : functioning education, health, Department of Transportation, EPA etc., DoJ, Police and so on, or three decades of protestant vs catholic war? While, far from leaving the rest out of trouble, the situation spills into Canada and Mexico with even a couple bombings in Brazil, and US Jews have to flee wherever they can.
If that was bitter sarcasm, let us know.
"Excellent president"
Sure, if you ignore the fact that:
1) He dismantled the protections that American consumers had from Wall Street when he signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
2) He destroyed the Democratic Party as a party of the people when he led the "Third Way" into control of the party and made it into the conservative, pro-corporate trash that it is today. (Which is ironically, led to the rise of people like DWS who destroyed Hillary's campaign for president.)
3) Waco and Ruby Ridge happened under Clinton's DOJ, which led to the further rise of insane right-wing militias. Those incidents also led directly to the Oklahoma City Bombing.
4) Clinton arguably committed war crimes in Serbia. (Part of his expertise on the Balkans that you cite so favourable?)
5) Osama Bin Laden attributed Clinton's bombing of the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory (which killed tens of thousands of Sudanese as a result of lack of medicine) as one of his motivations for revenge on 9/11.
6) Don't Ask; Don't Tell. DOMA.
7) The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act
8) The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
Other than that, great president though.
Basically, the guy was lucky enough to be president at the time that the economy was booming because the Cold War was over and the Internet happened. And he at least had enough foresight not to fuck those things up. (And most of that foresight was probably attributable to Gore and Clinton's pro-corporate interests.)
So far US government has utterly failed to provide any compelling evidence to support it's assertions. Yet another worthless mostly off-topic 13 page document crying about success of foreign propaganda rather than supporting any of it's positions with evidence.
Everyone knows what "RT" is. It's no secret to anyone who isn't living under a rock why they exist and what they do any more than it's no secret why VOA/CNN exist.
All I've seen on CNN the past few weeks is... Wikileaks is an agent of Russia, Wikileaks stole information, Assange is wanted for rape, Assange rapes little girls and persistently pathetic stories of low morale and despair among TLAs because Trump won't listen to them.... WAHHHHHHH.
Do I trust US intel to provide truthful and accurate "assessments" to the public? After curveball's mobile production facilities, aluminum tubes and Uranium (dramatic pause) from Africa do you really need to ask?
The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution makes it quite clear that the popular vote is irrelevant when it comes to electing the President.
And the First Amendment makes it clear that it is perfectly legal to talk about the popular vote.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
The other consideration is Trump may have been able to win the popular vote if it mattered. The Republicans sensibly wrote off California early in the campaign, so it's hard to know things would have turned out if they'd had to compete here.
Damn Hairy! There's your problem, she should have run for President of Mexico!
-- I have a private email server in my basement.
Where's the Beef? Here is the Declassified version of the U.S. Intelligence Report regarding Russia.
https://www.dni.gov/files/docu...
You know, the one cited for proof of undermining the U.S. election process. Well, I've read it, and I will sum it up with the following:
TOTAL BUNK...
Just some highlights...
"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"
This was funny, so they're only focused on undermining the liberal democratic order, conservatives and libertarians - YOU ARE SAFE!
"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."
The fact that statement is made, shows that this entire intelligence review is utter BS and mere politics. There is NO reason for Russia to be supporting Trump, and the actions could have just as easily benefited Bernie Sanders. If they were to accuse Russia of a motive, it would be to prevent Hillary being elected. Nothing to do with her competitors.
"When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election" Really, cause the appearances and statements across U.S. media was that this was an apparent given that Hillary would win and be our next president. This was de facto for a year or more.
I saw in another article that they had record of Russian officials celebrating upon Trump's win. And clearly this means they were for Trump. Bogus. I didn't want Trump, but I was happy to not have Hillary. And I believe the Russians simply did NOT want Hillary - for good reason.
"Russia’s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and international audiences."
Which has zero affect on U.S. populace. Really, so what...we have tons of evidence that the mainstream media was a propaganda machine for Hillary which went so far as to rigged debates and more.
"Kremlin’s TV Seeks To Influence Politics, Fuel Discontent in US" Really? How many American's were watching Kremlin TV?
Basically, this report is Russian media outlets denigrated Hillary, while U.S. media outlets denigrated Bernie and Trump. And it's only okay for foreign media to denigrate Trump, not Hillary.
"Putin publicly pointed to the Panama Papers disclosure and the Olympic doping scandal as US-directed efforts to defame Russia, suggesting he sought to use disclosures to discredit the image of the United States and cast it as hypocritical."
HE IS RIGHT, IT WAS!!!
Do I doubt Russia has hacked U.S. systems. Not one bit. Every government is doing it. Though few at the level the U.S. is. We've conducted more hacking and election affecting than every other country in the world has combined. So threatening military action and retaliation is not only hypocritical, it's ludicrously insane.
Gee, so per the document Russia has had agents involved in monitoring the election process since the Carter days. Of course they do. So do we. Of course they're going to want to have insight into who will be the head of their largest rival. Duh... nothing to see here, go home.
"Russia Times aired a documentary about the Occupy Wall Street movement on 1, 2, and 4 November. RT framed the movement as a fight against "the ruling class" and described the current US political system as corrupt and dominated by corporations."
Um, ya...seems like the truth to me.
So far as I read this, it pretty much appears to be 25 pages going thru decades of Russia and U.S. opposing opinions and expressions. Well duh...we did have a cold war. And even after it's pretty much been lukewarm. So none of this crap is evidence for U.S. claims being made against Russia currently.
At
Clinton absolutely fucked up the dotcom bubble, Bush took the heat, inheriting the mess.
You're remembering it wrong. There was nothing to clean up, the market had already corrected by the time GWB took office. The housing bubble mess he left for Obama, on the other hand, took a while.
You're only getting the public portion of the report, the part that doesn't compromise methods. Instead of making up your own stories about this, you should be asking people that have sat in the intelligence briefings what their opinion is, and whether the remaining, and valid, questions have been answered.
Fuck you! I'm from the Balkans and US involvement only made things worse.
Clearly you're not Albanian.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
> You're only getting the public portion of the report, the part that doesn't compromise methods.
I have secret evidence that your secret evidence is completely bogus. This same secret evidence also indicates that you secretly wet the bed last night. And 20 organizations have signed off on it. Secretly. So it must be true! Unnamed high-level sources will gladly confirm this to any credulous media outlets that ask me about it. So you can't dispute it, just trust the experts. We have top men working on it right now. Top men. ~
See, it doesn't work that way. The burden of proof is on them. You can't be rational and still accept things based on secret, unverifiable evidence. The US public did this already and paid for it with stupid wars. You all were worried about fake news, but it's A-OK to start another lie-based war with secret evidence? Oh, and let's do that with a nuclear power this time. That's *really* good for the environment.... right?
I've seen the public evidence. The Russian state does not need to use ancient versions of P.A.S. Tor exit nodes are not evidence that Russia did anything. This isn't what nation state level hacking looks like to begin with and we do know that thanks to what we saw from the Belgacom hacks, from the leaks of the NSA's Tao catalog, or even the evaluation of Stuxnet.
If they were any good, they'd have been the ones to tell us that malware was an old version of P.A.S. All that took was someone googling, so what "sources and methods" would that have compromised? If they miss something that utterly basic, how can we trust the rest of the secret report of secret evidence from known liars? Why didn't they report that most of those IPs were Tor exit nodes?
It's supposed to be "trust, but verify" anyhow, not just "trust us." And I've done the verification on this one. This is a snow job.
I'm not dumb enough to fall for it. Are you?