CIA assessment: Russia intervened to help Trump win election

[SueEllenRules!]

Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House
The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.

• Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.
  
• “It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”
  
• The Obama administration has been debating for months how to respond to the alleged Russian intrusions, with White House officials concerned about escalating tensions with Moscow and being accused of trying to boost Clinton’s campaign.
  
• In September, during a secret briefing for congressional leaders, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) voiced doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to officials present.
• In a secure room in the Capitol used for briefings involving classified information, administration officials broadly laid out the evidence U.S. spy agencies had collected, showing Russia’s role in cyber-intrusions in at least two states and in hacking the emails of the Democratic organizations and individuals.
  
• And they made a case for a united, bipartisan front in response to what one official described as “the threat posed by unprecedented meddling by a foreign power in our election process.”
• According to several officials, McConnell raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.
• Some of the Republicans in the briefing also seemed opposed to the idea of going public with such explosive allegations in the final stages of an election, a move that they argued would only rattle public confidence and play into Moscow’s hands.
• McConnell’s office did not respond to a request for comment. After the election, Trump chose McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao, as his nominee for transportation secretary.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.806e418b3aac

 

[Frank Underwood]

I feel conflicted about this. On one hand, I don't condone the hacking of private emails. On the other hand, I'm glad we learned what the DNC and Hillary were up to. From the DNC trying to sabotage Bernie's campaign, to Hillary admitting she has both a public and private position on the issues, those are things I'm glad we were privy to.

As for the hacked emails being a "Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances," isn't that ironic? In their attempt to help Trump win, they revealed that the DNC also played favorites during the Democratic primary.

Russia, take note. Only our own political parties are allowed to meddle in our election process.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

I'm not the least bit conflicted about this. I don't want Russia or any other foreign power putting their guy in the White House. Period. End of story.

 

[Frank Underwood]

I'm not the least bit conflicted about this. I don't want Russia or any other foreign power putting their guy in the White House. Period. End of story.

That's not what I was conflicted about, as I certainly don't want that either.

The conflict comes from being against the hacking of emails, yet feeling the information released was valuable. It was the transparency that Hillary and the DNC were not going to give us, for obvious reasons. If releasing this information swayed the election at all, it was an indirect result. Russia shouldn't have hacked the emails, but the DNC and the Hillary campaign shouldn't have left an electronic trail of their scheming either. That's the nuance of the situation.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

For God's sake, who on earth cares about the nuance of the situation when the headline here is Russia wanted Trump to be our president?? And the sons of b!tches got what they wanted! And now the White House is in the hands of Putin's puppet.

 

[Angela Channing]

And don't forget Trump encouraged Russia to hack Hillary's email: "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing... I think you'll be rewarded mightily by our press", he said during the campaign. What really saddens me is that Americans knew this but still thought he was a suitable person to be President.

 

[DoTreadOnMe]

LMAO. Hilarious. I bet I could sell you oceanfront property in Arizona.

Putin and Hillary are the ones that had nefarious relationship with Boeing right there in the middle of it. See Boeing 3.7 billion dollar deal done with Hillary and Russia, Boeing via Iran, the corker bill, All tied into the Clinton Crime Foundation

Its called projection, if you're guilty of something rule 1 is to accuse your opponent of the exact thing you are guilty of, read Saul Alinsky.

Let me know if you need a quote on that property.

 

[Angela Channing]

LMAO. Hilarious. I bet I could sell you oceanfront property in Arizona.

Putin and Hillary are the ones that had nefarious relationship with Boeing right there in the middle of it. See Boeing 3.7 billion dollar deal done with Hillary and Russia, Boeing via Iran, the corker bill, All tied into the Clinton Crime Foundation

Its called projection, if you're guilty of something rule 1 is to accuse your opponent of the exact thing you are guilty of, read Saul Alinsky.

Let me know if you need a quote on that property.

Are you McGarrett? Your choice of words, sentence structure and general tone is the same as the person who posts under that name.

 

[DoTreadOnMe]

In my philosophies I am one with the Universe, I am all things and nothing at the same time.

 

[Frank Underwood]

For God's sake, who on earth cares about the nuance of the situation when the headline here is Russia wanted Trump to be our president?? And the sons of b!tches got what they wanted! And now the White House is in the hands of Putin's puppet.

I believe the nuance of the situation is important. Why? Because, while I don't want a foreign power meddling in our elections, I also don't want our own political parties doing the same thing. I don't condone the way that the DNC and Podesta emails were obtained, but I'm still glad the public had access to that information.

If the DNC and the Hillary campaign had acted above board, they would have had nothing to worry about either. The fact that Trump encouraged Russia to release these emails speaks to his character as well. I see no good guys in this scandal. Russia, Trump, the DNC, and Hillary only cared about their own self interest and power.

If anybody still wonders why I voted third party, it's because our mainstream parties are morally bankrupt.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

I believe the nuance of the situation is important. Why? Because, while I don't want a foreign power meddling in our elections, I also don't want our own political parties doing the same thing. I don't condone the way that the DNC and Podesta emails were obtained, but I'm still glad the public had access to that information.

If the DNC and the Hillary campaign had acted above board, they would have had nothing to worry about either. The fact that Trump encouraged Russia to release these emails speaks to his character as well. I see no good guys in this scandal. Russia, Trump, the DNC, and Hillary only cared about their own self interest and power.

If anybody still wonders why I voted third party, it's because our mainstream parties are morally bankrupt.

The Russian government has installed their chosen candidate as President of the United States and your primary concern is the moral bankruptcy of mainstream political parties? Seriously??

 

[Frank Underwood]

The Russian government has installed their chosen candidate as President of the United States and your primary concern is the moral bankruptcy of mainstream political parties? Seriously??

Except Russia didn't install their chosen candidate, at least not directly. It was ultimately up to the voters to decide if the information released was damning enough for them to vote for Trump.

The information was obtained illegally, but it showed the DNC was also conspiring to install their chosen candidate. Meanwhile, Hillary admitted to holding different positions in public and private. And Trump was right there egging Russia on. So yes, the moral bankruptcy of our political parties is as much of a concern to me as Russia's involvement.

You believe the focus should be solely on Russia, but the fact is nobody acted in good faith here.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Except Russia didn't install their chosen candidate, at least not directly. It was ultimately up to the voters to decide if the information released was damning enough for them to vote for Trump.

The information was obtained illegally, but it showed the DNC was also conspiring to install their chosen candidate. Meanwhile, Hillary admitted to holding different positions in public and private. And Trump was right there egging Russia on. So yes, the moral bankruptcy of our political parties is as much of a concern to me as Russia's involvement.

You believe the focus should be solely on Russia, but the fact is nobody acted in good faith here.

I'm sure the Trump administration and the GOP are hoping the rest of the country will pay a similar amount of attention to that man behind the curtain.

 

[Frank Underwood]

I'm sure the Trump administration and the GOP are hoping the rest of the country will pay a similar amount of attention to that man behind the curtain.

The "man behind the curtain" did wrong, yet exposed wrongdoing in the process. Why is it controversial to say that? I don't have to give the DNC a pass in order to condemn Russia's actions. I already said I think they're all corrupt, including Trump for encouraging Russia to release the emails.

That said, anybody that believes Russia is directly responsible for President Trump is dreaming. It would be different if they rigged voting machines or altered ballots. Instead, they released emails showing the DNC was conspiring to make their preferred candidate their nominee. A bit ironic, don't you think?

Russia may have released the emails hoping it would benefit Trump, but the voters were still left to make their choice.

 

[Angela Channing]

The "man behind the curtain" did wrong, yet exposed wrongdoing in the process. Why is it controversial to say that? I don't have to give the DNC a pass in order to condemn Russia's actions. I already said I think they're all corrupt, including Trump for encouraging Russia to release the emails.

That said, anybody that believes Russia is directly responsible for President Trump is dreaming. It would be different if they rigged voting machines or altered ballots. Instead, they released emails showing the DNC was conspiring to make their preferred candidate their nominee. A bit ironic, don't you think?

Russia may have released the emails hoping it would benefit Trump, but the voters were still left to make their choice.

Although I see where you're coming from I think there is a different scale of wrong doing here. Democratic Party politicians and officials working to support their favoured candidate was not illegal, unless I've missed something. A foreign power acting to subvert the outcome of a democratic election in another country by illegally accessing private emails is illegal. A Presidential candidate encouraging that foreign country to take that illegal action is deplorable. Sure the DNC didn't conduct themselves well but we shouldn't let our disappointment that Bernie didn't win or that Trump was elected obscure the fact that Russia got want they wanted: Trump elected President. Time will tell why Russia think that is to their benefit.

 

[Frank Underwood]

Although I see where you're coming from I think there is a different scale of wrong doing here. Democratic Party politicians and officials working to support their favoured candidate was not illegal, unless I've missed something. A foreign power acting to subvert the outcome of a democratic election in another country by illegally accessing private emails is illegal. A Presidential candidate encouraging that foreign country to take that illegal action is deplorable. Sure the DNC didn't conduct themselves well but we shouldn't let our disappointment that Bernie didn't win or that Trump was elected obscure the fact that Russia got want they wanted: Trump elected President. Time will tell why Russia think that is to their benefit.

That's a valid point, and I even called Russia's hacking illegal from the get go.

However, that illegal act exposed the impartiality of the DNC. And while their actions may not have been illegal, they were certainly unethical. That's why I'm glad the exposure led to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

On the other hand, we can't allow a foreign nation to hack our emails and get away with it. Hence the nuance of it.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

The "man behind the curtain" did wrong, yet exposed wrongdoing in the process. Why is it controversial to say that? I don't have to give the DNC a pass in order to condemn Russia's actions. I already said I think they're all corrupt, including Trump for encouraging Russia to release the emails.

That said, anybody that believes Russia is directly responsible for President Trump is dreaming. It would be different if they rigged voting machines or altered ballots. Instead, they released emails showing the DNC was conspiring to make their preferred candidate their nominee. A bit ironic, don't you think?

Russia may have released the emails hoping it would benefit Trump, but the voters were still left to make their choice.

So at what point should we be concerned that the Russian government interfered in the U.S. presidential election? When Trump nominates someone who's in bed with Putin for a critical position in his cabinet? Oh, wait...he already named the CEO of Exxon as Secretary of State.

 

[Frank Underwood]

Also, it's worth keeping in mind that many Democrats believed the FBI's investigation of Hillary was simply an excuse to hurt her in the election. However, those same Democrats aren't questioning the CIA's accusation that Russia is behind the hacked emails. Republicans are just the opposite. They believe every investigation of Hillary should result in a conviction, but believe blaming Russia for the hacked emails is just "partisan politics." This is why many people have lost faith in their government, and take everything said with a grain of salt. Everything is partisan now.

Another issue worth noting is how this is being spun in the press. The Democrats keep saying that the Russians "hacked the election," which is ridiculously misleading. That makes it sound like they tampered with the votes, when what they really did was release emails from the DNC and John Podesta to Wikileaks. That's hardly the same thing as hacking the election results. Democrats are now resorting to the kind of trickery that Republicans are known for.

As for the information released, I believe it should have been available to the public anyway. Because of the emails, we learned that the DNC chose to bury the debates and suggested attacking Bernie over his religion. Donna Brazile was caught leaking debate questions to Hillary, and Hillary herself admitted to having both a public and private stance on the issues. These sort of unethical shenanigans should not be allowed to go on behind closed doors. We deserve transparency when it comes to how our political parties conduct themselves. Thanks to the information released, Debbie Wasserman Shcultz lost her chair position with the DNC, and Donna Brazile was ousted from CNN.

Lastly, if a major political party's emails are this vulnerable to attacks, their Internet security is clearly not up to par.

 

[Frank Underwood]

So at what point should we be concerned that the Russian government interfered in the U.S. presidential election? When Trump nominates someone who's in bed with Putin for a critical position in his cabinet? Oh, wait...he already named the CEO of Exxon as Secretary of State.

I've said countless times in this thread that Russia's hacking into emails was a cause for concern. I called it illegal, an act of bad faith, and said it shouldn't go unpunished. Of course, after the Iraq War fiasco, I don't take what my government tells me at face value. If we're going after Russia over this, the intelligence must be infallible. What more can I say?

I feel like you expect me to only criticize Russia, and forget about the information released. If that transparency made people not want to vote for Hillary, can we really lay all of the blame on Russia for that? If I told a friend I committed fraud in an email, and that email was hacked and released, it wouldn't absolve me from the wrongdoing I did.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]