Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

Feel free to have a read of the report.

I'll save you some time and tell you categorically that they have published no evidence.

Unless you count this as evidence: 'the intelligence community finds that Russia influenced the election'. (They have nothing to back this up sadly).

Bizarrely the majority of the report is talking about RT not liking Hillary Clinton, which is somehow a bad thing. RT even had the audacity to concentrate on Hillary's emails according to this. Shocking stuff. Some of the 'evidence' includes: RT ran a television documentary on Julian Assange. Wow, conclusive.

I can't even believe how flimsy this thing is. I expected more on actual hacking rather than a 25 page document on how RT is bad. We know RT is bad, it's just as bad as CNN acting as a mouthpiece for the Clinton campaign.

Comical, but sad for those who put their eggs in this basket.
 
Quite a good summary from 4chan:

yUnzKUc.png


Christ this thing gets better upon rereading!

Moscow also saw the election of President-elect Trump as a way to achieve an international counterterrorism coalition against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Click to expand...

Those evil Russian bastards!!!
 
Last edited:
But there is some good news from this report, the 'intelligence community' confirm categorically that Wikileaks has a 100% reliability record and didn't publish a single forged document.

Unlucky for some.

T5ptke.png
 
@BluePhil8 said:
But there is some good news from this report, the 'intelligence community' confirm categorically that Wikileaks has a 100% reliability record and didn't publish a single forged document.

Unlucky for some.

T5ptke.png
Click to expand...


Do they really say that Wikileaks is 100% reliable? If so they are putting themselves out of a job surely? Trump can dismantle the CIA and all intelligence services and just skim Wikileaks now and again for 100% reliable trusted intelligence. Trump is driving such a wedge between himself and his intelligence services he may as well do that anyway - this will come round to bite him on the arse when something nasty kicks off and its a total surprise to him because of the fractured relationship between the White House and the CIA. Just think of what came out post Bataclan attack of how French Police and Intelligence agencies relationships were dysfunctional and how their relationship with Belgian authorities was poor too. This is a dangerous side effect of Trumps paranoia.
 
@BluePhil8 said:
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

Feel free to have a read of the report.

I'll save you some time and tell you categorically that they have published no evidence.

Unless you count this as evidence: 'the intelligence community finds that Russia influenced the election'. (They have nothing to back this up sadly).

Bizarrely the majority of the report is talking about RT not liking Hillary Clinton, which is somehow a bad thing. RT even had the audacity to concentrate on Hillary's emails according to this. Shocking stuff. Some of the 'evidence' includes: RT ran a television documentary on Julian Assange. Wow, conclusive.

I can't even believe how flimsy this thing is. I expected more on actual hacking rather than a 25 page document on how RT is bad. We know RT is bad, it's just as bad as CNN acting as a mouthpiece for the Clinton campaign.

Comical, but sad for those who put their eggs in this basket.
Click to expand...
They aren't allowed to publish the evidence as it is classified.
 
@BluePhil8 said:
But there is some good news from this report, the 'intelligence community' confirm categorically that Wikileaks has a 100% reliability record and didn't publish a single forged document.

Unlucky for some.

T5ptke.png
Click to expand...
Has the reliability of what Wikileaks publishes ever been doubted? Im not aware that it has, or if it has Ive missed it. Its more of a moral issue as to how it comes by the info and whether it should be published?
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
Has the reliability of what Wikileaks publishes ever been doubted? Im not aware that it has, or if it has Ive missed it. Its more of a moral issue as to how it comes by the info and whether it should be published?
Click to expand...
It was on here in the election thread by quite a few people.
 
With Wikileaks, there's more than a slight difference between saying that their disclosures didn't contain any evident forgeries and confirming categorically that they have a 100% reliability record as some posters seem to have inferred.
 
Pokes28 said:
The intelligence talking heads that have been all over the new are mostly going to be gone in a couple weeks. They really have nothing to lose.

My stance on this is that until evidence is presented, we are just getting filtered words. I've seen first hand the watering down process of technical reporting as it flows up the chain of command to a point that it no longer says what the intent of the tech writing it meant. It is a pretty common issue.

The reality is that there were two hacks. First was Podesta's e-mail which was a Gmail account. By all accounts, it could have been hacked by just about anybody because he is a moron. There is nobody talking about his account being hacked by the Russians. However most of the biggest revelations of the campaign came from his account.

The DNC system was hacked by somebody. Maybe the Russians, maybe the Chinese, or the ghost of Richard Nixon. We really don't know. There weren't a ton of major revaluations that were released from this hack. Sure there were some items about how the deck was stacked against Bernie Sanders and for Hillary that led to DWS stepping down as the DNC Chairman. But really, that was about it. But keep in mind, that the DNC servers are not government devices. This would be no different than somebody hacking the NRA in that the intent could be to do harm on a national level and turn the discussions in a particular way.

I do find it laughable that many on both sides of the aisle are screaming that internet security has to be fixed. It isn't that simple. And even if it were that simple, that won't cover the GOP, DNC, Clinton Foundation, etc. Another thing I find ironic is that there have been a ton of big hacks against Homeland Security, the FBI, NASA, Justice, the IRS, and perhaps others. It was on good information that some of these were done by China and Russia. But none of that caused the shit storm that the hack against a non-government entity has caused. Not a single public reaction against those countries. But based on the current talking points that Russia did this, Obama gets tough and expels some diplomats and puts tanks and stuff closer to Russian soil. Really? This is the line in the sand?
Click to expand...

Interesting. If they were saying they helped Clinton win would you be bending over backwards to accommodate that?

Didn't think so.
 
I'm lucky enough to have drawn the lunatic in the 2017 death pool in the office.
That £34 is mine :-)
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
Boy, ol' Don sure can pick 'em, can't he? I'm sure the 61 different examples of her dishonesty cited endears her even more to the transition team rather than repelling them.

http://money.cnn.com/interactive/ne...owley-plagiarized-multiple-sources-2012-book/
Click to expand...
Bit odd to project that on to Trump.

Did you blame Hillary for employing Huma Abedin who's paedophile husband had archived emails on his laptop? Maybe the fact that she was married to a paedophile endeared her even more to the Clintons rather than repelling them.
 
@BluePhil8 said:
Bit odd to project that on to Trump.

Did you blame Hillary for employing Huma Abedin who's paedophile husband had archived emails on his laptop? Maybe the fact that she was married to a paedophile endeared her even more to the Clintons rather than repelling them.
Click to expand...
Paedophile?
When was the conviction for that? I seem to have missed it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top