Trump and Russia

[Deranged Rhino]

RIP TO THE JANUARY 6th DNI REPORT:

 

Over the past few weeks, three pieces of evidence - real evidence, not evidence that relies on unnamed sources citing unnamed methods - have come to light that blow a huge hole in major portions of the "Russian collusion" story's main piece of evidence: The DNI report issued in January of this year.

 

Shockingly, much of this evidence has been ignored by the MSM and the loudest supporters of this narrative on this board - despite most of those same folks spending the past six months telling me I was wrong for raising these very same concerns...

 

Let's lay it out step by step.

 

1) Let's start with basic reading comprehension: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/06/us/politics/document-russia-hacking-report-intelligence-agencies.html

 

This is the DNI report issued in January, the same report being touted by many as being the best evidence because it comes from the USIC itself. The report was sold to the public as being comprehensive (if unclassified) analysis from all 17 US Intel agencies who unanimously agreed that Russia had "hacked" the election.

 

Many posters on here have held this report up as all the evidence they needed to believe the narrative being spun. When I pointed out to them, simply by reading the report itself, that it was not from all 17 agencies and in fact wasn't even presenting a consensus within the three agencies it actually came from (NSA, CIA, DHS), I was told - repeatedly - how I was wrong.

 

Then a funny thing happened at the end of June. The NYT's issued a correction, buried of course, that admitted a basic error in their now seven month long disinformation campaign:

 

 

 

Correction: June 29, 2017

A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

 

 

 

This correction is important, not just because it shows that the NYT and other outlets knowingly lied for months about the unanimous consensus of the USIC, but because it completely omits the second most troubling part of the January DNI report - namely how the team was assembled... which brings us to:

 

2) On July 12th, this report came out detailing how the DNI report came to be: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/did-17-intelligence-agencies-really-come-to-consensus-on-russia/

 

Again, much of this could be discerned by reading the DNI report itself, presuming you have a basic understanding about how intel is gathered, analyzed and processed within the USIC.

 

 

"The problem, however, was that it wasn’t the U.S. intelligence community, per se, undertaking this investigation, but rather (according to the Washington Post) a task force composed of “several dozen analysts from the CIA, NSA and FBI,” hand-picked by the CIA director and set up at the CIA Headquarters who “functioned as a sealed compartment, its work hidden from the rest of the intelligence community.”

The result was a closed-circle of analysts who operated in complete isolation from the rest of the U.S. intelligence community."

 

This exposes yet another lie which has been repeated to the point of now being taken for granted and absolute truth by the MSM and various talking heads within the USIC. The DNI Report was not a consensus of opinion within all 17 agencies, it wasn't even the consensus of opinion within the three agencies that actually compiled the report (DHS, NSA, CIA). Rather, it was the conclusion the small task force created by Directors Brennan and Clapper were ORDERED TO REACH.

After the WMD debacle in the early 2000's, the USIC rewrote their rule books to avoid repeating such a mistake of confirmation bias clouding active intel analysis. Part of this culture shift was the regulations to not create insular task forces within the USIC but rather to more freely exchange information and investigations between relevant branches. Clapper and Brennan's actions, by creating a separate investigative group and insulating them, is in direct violation of those new guidelines.

Think about that for a moment. Clapper and Brennan - two men who dealt with the WMD investigations at different times, both men who have perjured themselves before Congress and Senate on issues of domestic collection and various USIC programs' over reach, broke the protocols they were a part of creating to FORCE the conclusion they wanted to reach. It's, quite literally, a repeat of the WMD agenda. Only this time the stakes aren't a poorly thought out invasion of a weak country - but the undercutting of our national confidence in our electoral process while poking the nose of the world's largest thermonuclear power.

Motive is always important to examine in these cases, and it should be noted that both Brennan and Clapper have been at the forefront of the USIC's regime change war in Syria. It's an agenda they've been engineering and working towards for years now. And Trump's incoming administration - whether they meant it or not - campaigned and won in no small part because of their promises to end the nation's regime change addiction.

This means that both Clapper and Brennan had a clear motive to undercut 45's incoming administration and to paint a target on Russia by engineering a fear campaign through their chosen MSM outlets (the NYT, Washington Post, CNN primarily).

So, at the end of the day, the January DNI report which has been touted as proof by many here and in the media, has been completely blown out of the water just by these admissions:

- It's not a consensus.

- It was not compiled following proper USIC protocol.

- It was, by their own admission, an investigation designed to prove Russian meddling and hacking rather than an honest investigation into the event itself.

3) Now that we've established the DNI report itself was flawed in design and pushed onto the public by Brennan, Clapper, and the MSM in a dishonest and propagandizing way - what about the actual evidence offered in the report itself?

A new analysis was dropped this week by a collection of Intel vets working on behalf of the public - who signed their names and cited their sources and methods, more than the USIC has done to date. Their examination of the limited forensic evidence offered in the DNI report shows that the evidence itself was deliberately tampered with and that the story of hacking itself is impossible:

*edit: forgot the link: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/

 

From the information available, we conclude that the same inside-DNC, copy/leak process was used at two different times, by two different entities, for two distinctly different purposes:

-(1) an inside leak to WikiLeaks before Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016, that he had DNC documents and planned to publish them (which he did on July 22) – the presumed objective being to expose strong DNC bias toward the Clinton candidacy; and

-(2) a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by “showing” it came from a “Russian hack.”

(snip)

The January 6 “Intelligence Community Assessment” by “hand-picked” analysts from the FBI, CIA, and NSA seems to fit into the same agenda-driven category. It is largely based on an “assessment,” not supported by any apparent evidence, that a shadowy entity with the moniker “Guccifer 2.0” hacked the DNC on behalf of Russian intelligence and gave DNC emails to WikiLeaks.

The recent forensic findings mentioned above have put a huge dent in that assessment and cast serious doubt on the underpinnings of the extraordinarily successful campaign to blame the Russian government for hacking. The pundits and politicians who have led the charge against Russian “meddling” in the U.S. election can be expected to try to cast doubt on the forensic findings, if they ever do bubble up into the mainstream media. But the principles of physics don’t lie; and the technical limitations of today’s Internet are widely understood. We are prepared to answer any substantive challenges on their merits.

(snip)

Independent cyber-investigators have now completed the kind of forensic work that the intelligence assessment did not do. Oddly, the “hand-picked” intelligence analysts contented themselves with “assessing” this and “assessing” that. In contrast, the investigators dug deep and came up with verifiable evidence from metadata found in the record of the alleged Russian hack.

They found that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 was not a hack, by Russia or anyone else. Rather it originated with a copy (onto an external storage device – a thumb drive, for example) by an insider. The data was leaked after being doctored with a cut-and-paste job to implicate Russia. We do not know who or what the murky Guccifer 2.0 is. You may wish to ask the FBI.

The Time Sequence

June 12, 2016: Assange announces WikiLeaks is about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton.”

June 15, 2016: DNC contractor Crowdstrike, (with a dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest) announces that malware has been found on the DNC server and claims there is evidence it was injected by Russians.

June 15, 2016: On the same day, “Guccifer 2.0” affirms the DNC statement; claims responsibility for the “hack;” claims to be a WikiLeaks source; and posts a document that the forensics show was synthetically tainted with “Russian fingerprints.”

We do not think that the June 12 & 15 timing was pure coincidence. Rather, it suggests the start of a pre-emptive move to associate Russia with anything WikiLeaks might have been about to publish and to “show” that it came from a Russian hack.

The Key Event

July 5, 2016: In the early evening, Eastern Daylight Time, someone working in the EDT time zone with a computer directly connected to the DNC server or DNC Local Area Network, copied 1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds onto an external storage device. That speed is many times faster than what is physically possible with a hack.

It thus appears that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 (the self-proclaimed WikiLeaks source) was not a hack by Russia or anyone else, but was rather a copy of DNC data onto an external storage device. Moreover, the forensics performed on the metadata reveal there was a subsequent synthetic insertion – a cut-and-paste job using a Russian template, with the clear aim of attributing the data to a “Russian hack.” This was all performed in the East Coast time zone.

 

Re-read that again, and consider this evidence in conjunction with the rest of the "narrative" spun about this January 6th DNI report. What this report is saying is that the evidence offered to the American public by the DNI report was tampered with and altered to hide the presence of a leaker (not hacker) and an attempt was made to pin it all on Russia.

This is proven even further by the Vault 7 drops by Wikileaks this year which released the USIC's cyber weapon cache to the public. Chief among these tools are Umbrage (http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/wikileaks-files-cia-umbrage-hacker-secret-spies-explained-countries-donald-trump-russia-a7618661.html) and Marbles (http://thehackernews.com/2017/03/cia-marble-framework.html) both of which are programs which make it possible to mask/fake ISP addresses.

The forensic analysis of the DNI documents show proof of these programs in action. Meaning, the USIC deliberatley altered the key evidence it presented to the American public as proof of Russian interference and hacking in the election.

In other words, they lied to the American public. What makes anyone of us so certain they're not still lying?

All of this leads me back to a question I've asked many in this thread and have yet to hear an answer to. If you honestly believe Russian Intelligence agencies launched a massively successful hacking/propaganda campaign that duped the public into voting for Trump - is it not possible that the USIC has the same capabilities and reach to wage an information war on their own people?

Because the final analysis of the DNI report shows a concerted effort on behalf of Brennan, Clapper, elements within the US MSM and Congress to mislead the American public and scare them into buying into the next "Big Bad" that the US MiC will need generous budgets to combat.

This isn't partisan. This is absolute evidence that the DNI report touted by many on here was intentionally crafted to mislead the American public into a false conclusion.

And those of you on the left who are so blinded by your desire to remove Trump and sink him with this story, I ask you to consider this article in its entirety first:

With New D.C. Policy Group, Dems Continue to Rehabilitate and Unify With Bush-Era Neocon

It shows, once again, where the motivations for this narrative truly lie. It's not really about the DNC protecting it's party or Hillary making excuses. It's not really about protecting our "sacred institutions"... It seems to be about the continuation of regime change policies pushed by the neocon establishment which, with the help of this narrative, have now flipped to the left side of the aisle. A move that should outrage anyone who protested against W's wars in the desert.

Conclusion: We are in an information war. Up is not up and down is not down. Discernment is key. It's taken seven months for the MSM to admit the DNI report was flawed (at best). In that time, the narrative has been allowed to metastasize primarily by people flaunting the DNI report as proof.

What actual discernment and evidence shows is the Russian narrative has been concocted at worst, overblown at best, from the very beginning.

Stay frosty out there, people.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Deranged Rhino

[Maury Ballstein]

Get rid of sessions thank god

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This. Someone show grandpa sessions where the retirement home is.

[row_33]

Just reading a column by Elizabeth Drew on how some document found back in May is the final dagger for Trump. Swing and a miss...strike one hundred and fifty eight!!!

[Tiberius]

 

 

 

Russian officials warned they will retaliate against new sanctions passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday. The new measureto advance financial penalties in response to interference in the 2016 electiondoesnt leave room for the normalization of relations, said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Konstantin Kosachyov, the chairman of the international affairs committee in Russian parliament, also wrote on Facebook that hope is dying for such improved relations and that the coming response from Moscow will be painful for the Americans. Kosachyov said the scale of the anti-Russian consensus in Congress makes dialogue impossible.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-warns-of-painful-response-if-trump-backs-sanctions

[ALF]

More close calls for U.S. military aircraft. Advisors in Syria at more risk.

 

Russia could also ramp up cyber attacks.

Edited July 26, 2017 by ALF

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

More close calls for U.S. military aircraft. Advisors in Syria at more risk.

 

I'm sure this is Trump's fault somehow.

[ALF]

 

I'm sure this is Trump's fault somehow.

 

not this time

 

" Kosachyov said the scale of the anti-Russian consensus in Congress makes dialogue impossible."

Edited July 26, 2017 by ALF

[Deranged Rhino]

Not that I'm surprised, but the lack of response to the now verified proof that this whole investigation began with a purposefully misleading DNI report which relied on altered evidence to make its case, is telling.

 

I get it. It's been seven months of conditioning telling us that the Intel community agreed. Now we know for certain that was a lie but people don't want to give up the ghost.

 

Forget Russia for a moment and consider that Brennan and Clapper produced a document with falsified evidence to sway the American people. And the response from this revelation?

 

"I'm gonna ignore it because it's uncomfortable to my politics/view of the USIC."

 

Want to know how we lost our republic? By letting stuff like this slide.

[row_33]

It's better to actually have something tangible to investigate, with actual evidence that is admissible in court, than to start out in a drunken rage fishing exhibition and not admitting there is nothing there.

[B-Man]

And here's a fun reality check for "Russia hacked the election" crowd. Check the date on this story

 

 

 

"If the election was on October 27th I would have won"-Hillary Clinton

[reddogblitz]

Forget Russia for a moment and consider that Brennan and Clapper produced a document with falsified evidence to sway the American people. And the response from this revelation?

"I'm gonna ignore it because it's uncomfortable to my politics/view of the USIC."

Sure. Just like we did with the Iraq WMD "intelligence".

[Deranged Rhino]

Sure. Just like we did with the Iraq WMD "intelligence".

 

Absolutely.

 

This forensic data blows the DNI report out of the water. At best it shows a rush to judgment (like WMD), at worst it shows a deliberate attempt on the part of the acting director of CIA and the DNI to push a false agenda onto the public. It was lapped up and supported for seven months by a compliant media who failed to do basic due diligence on the material they were reporting on.

 

Remember, the entire foundation of the Russian meddling narrative stems from this DNI report. It gave validation to what had only been speculation and political posturing up until that point. And now it turns out it was fundamentally flawed (at best) or deliberately misleading (at worst) with the intent to undercut the incoming administration (which hadn't even been sworn in yet).

 

That's called a coup.

[DC Tom]

Sure. Just like we did with the Iraq WMD "intelligence".

 

The WMD intelligence was a lot more solid than this...

[Azalin]

[row_33]

 

The WMD intelligence was a lot more solid than this...

 

they think some kind of lameass retort makes everything better.

[Deranged Rhino]

Sorry for the crappy capture - happened this afternoon during the briefing:

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

If it turns out that the Steele Dossier was produced by the Russians, that would be firm evidence that the Democratic Party was colluding with the Russians to turn the election.

 

A case of "The Lady doth protest too much, me thinks."?

[Deranged Rhino]

If it turns out that the Steele Dossier was produced by the Russians, that would be firm evidence that the Democratic Party was colluding with the Russians to turn the election.

 

A case of "The Lady doth protest too much, me thinks."?

 

Yup.

 

This is in part why the Awan case is very relevant to the ongoing investigations into election meddling. Lots of rumors swirling (for months) that the DNC used the Awans as their own private intelligence ring (cyber division) on their opponents (not just Clinton doing this during the campaign, but many Democratic congresscritters and senators) while the Awans were simultaneously pilfering documents and sharing them with ISI. Some in the DNC were made aware of this - and kept them on the payroll because their ability to get dirt on their opponents proved more valuable than plugging a leak to Pakistani intelligence.

 

At this time that is still speculative - very much so. But if you do the digging yourself you'll see there is much more actual fire to those claims - and the Fusion FSP claims - than the rest of the Russian meddling narrative combined.

 

... Especially since it's now been established the initial DNI report was intentionally altered to force a conclusion.

As an added bit. Some team guys I've become acquainted with are all convinced that Ryan Owens' death earlier this year in Yemen was somehow the result of the leaks from Awan to the ISI. There are a lot of pissed off special operators out there who believe this to be what happened. But again, that's still speculative.

 

He's been in custody a little under 72 hours with two smashed laptops recovered during the arrest. It'll be interesting to see what's on those.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Russia is kicking out US diplo's.

Will he Veto the Bill only to be outvoted?

[DC Tom]

Russia is kicking out US diplo's.

Will he Veto the Bill only to be outvoted?

 

Odd the the Russian response mirror's Obama's orders from back in December.

 

I don't know if you should make a lot out of that. But you certainly can make a lot out of it, if you want to.