Declassified Version of US Intelligence Report Released

[Navarro]

DNI has now released the "unclassified version" of the report on Russian Hacks/Interference:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3254239-Russia-Hacking-report.html

The report is twenty-five pages long, and the vast majority of the report is dedicated to RT. No evidence to support the allegation of Russian hackers is provided. US Intelligence confirms the authenticity of the documents released by WikiLeaks. DHS affirms the Russians didn't compromise US voting machines. US Intelligence makes no argument that Russia effected the outcome of the election. The only link specified between Assange and the Russian government is an agreement in which RT provides the whistleblower with media spotlight, which any whistleblower would seek in order to ensure their disclosures reach a larger audience. The report did suggest that WikiLeaks was supplied with information by Russian hackers, but citied no evidence nor did it make any form of an attempt to quality the claim.

The report did however extensively cite articles, documentaries, television segments and tweets from RT and its staff, in which demonstrates that RT produces propaganda or content in which US Intelligence opposes press on the subject. Some of the stranger reports cited were instances in which RT anchors compared the United States to the Roman Empire, when RT provided US third-party candidates with press, and when RT reported on Occupy Wall Street. No evidence of an "act of war" perpetrated by Russia was at any time provided or otherwise suggested. While the points representing RT as propaganda is logical, the little else which remains of the report is unsubstantiated speculation, to include multiple fallacies.

To say the least: the report is underwhelming.

 

[Navarro]

"The undisguised and clearly politically motivated report on the alleged 2016 US 'election hack' displays a severe lack of 'professional discipline' in the intelligence community, former NSA technical director and whistleblower William Edward Binney told RT. While the report is full of allegations, it clearly lacks proof and even the wording used in the report points out that the authors have been playing a guessing game, Binney believes. ... The report veers off the 'hacking' narrative and rather surprisingly, but flatteringly, focuses on RT ... The whole situation is dangerous for the US itself, since it exposes serious immaturity in the intelligence services, which have basically lost the ability to perform their primary duties. 'Basically it means that our intelligence community has lost the professional discipline of an intelligence function. And this is very dangerous.' ... 'Because they are not being professional and disciplined in what they’re doing. That’s why they can’t stop any of these terrorist attacks.'"
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/372874-us-intelligence-lost-professional-discipline/

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

Russia didn't like it? I'm shocked! Just shocked!

 

[Navarro]

Russia didn't like it? I'm shocked! Just shocked!

Russia was "flattered," says the RT article. Seems they liked the report quite a lot.

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

To me, this whole things seems Much Ado Over Nothing. The report, and correct me if I am wrong, did not accuse Russia of actually tampering with the election. Only attempting to influence. Russia is accused of hacking.

Um....so? The US does all that too.

Did they actually say Russia hacked the DNC and gave the info to Wikileaks through a third party?

Ultimately, this whole thing seems blown waaaay out of proportion. But then, it really doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the President thinks and what he is going to do about it.

 

[Navarro]

Did they actually say Russia hacked the DNC and gave the info to Wikileaks through a third party?

There was an argument to that effect. The idea is that shortly after "Russian hackers" exfiltrated information from the DNC, WikiLeaks had it. No effort was made to prove the hacking was perpetrated by Russians however. It was simply suggested that the methods/tools being used were similar to methods/tools previously seen, which they thought was probably Russian when they first saw it.

It matters what the President thinks and what he is going to do about it.

Obama already indicated that he's convinced. As far as what he'll do: The report seems like a weak argument for additional sanctions against Russia, or perhaps a stronger argument for "exposing" or defaming RT/Russia/Putin, possibly somehow banning RT. There seemed to be some concern about RT producing "radical discontent" and fomenting rebellion, though the fomenting rebellion issue was more a matter of giving Occupy Wall Street press and allowing them to state their "revolution" agenda. Could also be America means to produce instability/rebelliousness among Russians as a goal of the exposing/defaming of Russia. A dangerous goal, if pursued.

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

It matters what the President thinks and what he is going to do about it.

Obama already indicated that he's convinced. As far as what he'll do: The report seems like a weak argument for additional sanctions against Russia, or perhaps a stronger argument for "exposing" or defaming RT/Russia/Putin, possibly somehow banning RT. There seemed to be some concern about RT producing "radical discontent" and fomenting rebellion, though the fomenting rebellion issue was more a matter of giving Occupy Wall Street press and allowing them to state their "revolution" agenda. Could also be America means to produce instability/rebelliousness among Russians as a goal of the exposing/defaming of Russia. A dangerous goal, if pursued.

I don't know. I think it really has more to do with Clinton losing the election. The Democrats need someone to blame other than themselves, and Russia is perfect for it. Since they hack all the time, it is easy to say this particular hack was what done them in, rather than their own flawed candidate. And so Obama is going to have some revenge on Russia. Another factor is that it de-legitimizes a Trump presidency, which is the main goal here. That boogey man was going to be found no matter what.

Let's say that Russia was going to go all in for Trump and do what they could to help him. So what did they do? They didn't make anything up or change voting results or anything like that. If what the U.S. is saying is true, all they did was expose secrets that the Democrats didn't want exposed. If the Democrats weren't doing evil, then nothing would have been exposed.

Weren't the Russians also trying to hack the RNC, but couldn't get in?

And truthfully, weren't Democrats trying to hack the RNC? And weren't Republicans trying to hack the DNC?

Again, the Democrats are crying over something that happens all the time. It's just this time they got stung.

And remember, I'm qualifying all that by saying that we really don't know what happened. We have a vague report that we are supposed to take on faith produced by agencies that are suspected of being politicized.

I'm not going to go all tinfoil hat on this. Like I said, Russia hacking the US isn't news. The US does it all the time, too. And the US interferes in elections. (Canada's recently.) So all this high and mighty, ever-so-righteous attitude by the US is really hypocrisy at its best.

With less than 15 days to go, there isn't much the US is going to be able to do to Russia. However, Trump has backed himself into a corner. He said he was going to do something, so now we wait and see what.

My immediate guess is nothing. He's going to let it go and hope the public forgets about this. The Democrats won't let them, but if Trump can take their mind off of it, they won't care.

But guaranteed we won't hear anything else but this come 2020.

 

[ThunderStealer]

Well....this was lame. I hope this isn't standard practice. Intelligence is a product derived from multiple disciplines and techniques that tell us what we think we know. This seems more like a pseudo-professional document written for domestic consumption. I liked their attacks on RT as justification for their assumptions that have yet to be proven. Well played, intelligence community.

 

[Obreid]

Might have missed this info being posted here earlier. If so my bad.

Washington (CNN)The Democratic National Committee "rebuffed" a request from the FBI to examine its computer services after it was allegedly hacked by Russia during the 2016 election, a senior law enforcement official told CNN Thursday.
If this hack of Russia was so certain and obvious it might have helped the administration and DNC if they had at least let FBI Or who ever analyze their servers that were hacked.
As it was our inteligance agency's were forced to investigate the alleged hack based upon a private security companies own scan of the DNC server.
That's why this report sucks and is so lacking any details.
The administration and the democrats said we want a report but no you won't have access to probably the key piece of evidence in the investigation.
Oh how can this story get any lamer.

 

[Navarro]

I don't know. I think it really has more to do with Clinton losing the election.

Several possibilities exist, and that's one of the potential motivations for the behavior. At this point, it appears unlikely that the intention to delegitimize the Trump presidency or to produce circumstances leading to impeachment. USIC is for example reporting no evidence or assessment that the election outcome was changed by external influence. Meanwhile we observe USIC behaving with intense aggression toward PEOTUS, and events as Harry Reid (Senate, SSCI) suggesting that USIC provide PEOTUS with incomplete or falsified reports, depriving the future POTUS of the information he needs to make sound policy decisions. Thus, a conspiracy may exist within the government to limit PEOTUS, producing a situation where the future POTUS will be impotent, and USIC rogue.

The intention may then be to maintain the current order. The Rusophobia may be a means to an end, or it may be indicative of the end. RF/CSTO/SCO is certainly competing with US/NATO/EU, and both sides are playing a subtle game of world domination. There's only one world to dominate, and America certainly intends to be the victor. If Trump will compromise America's position and future progress, then the establishment will obstruct his ability to do so. You can't befriend and cooperate with Russia while Congress and the American people are convinced Putin is dictator of the Evil Empire. You also can't control the activities of USIC if they only report to you in theory. Thus, Trump will not have the support of Congress, will not have control of USIC, Cold War propaganda will justify and demand continuity of the present domestic and foreign policy, and USIC will continue staging coups and so forth.

The Democrats need someone to blame other than themselves, and Russia is perfect for it. Since they hack all the time, it is easy to say this particular hack was what done them in, rather than their own flawed candidate. And so Obama is going to have some revenge on Russia.

Our leaders aren't quite that petty. It was never about the Democrats in any case, hence why so many Republican politicians oppose Trump. This is a bipartisan affair. The objective isn't revenge, but continuity of the current political establishment and the geopolitical venture.

Another factor is that it de-legitimizes a Trump presidency, which is the main goal here.

Not to delegitimize the presidency, but to limit the ability of PEOTUS to effect change or to otherwise compromise continuity. That's not to say Trump can't be delegitimized and impeached later, or worse if he's so problematic.

Weren't the Russians also trying to hack the RNC, but couldn't get in?

According to the report, yes. Anyway, it's probable that the Russians have endeavored to sift through all information produced and possessed by the American political establishment. As has been previously pointed out, America does the same in Russia.

We have a vague report that we are supposed to take on faith produced by agencies that are suspected of being politicized.

It served its purpose.

And the US interferes in elections. (Canada's recently.)

That trend will continue, despite Trump, unless he understands how to contend with USIC and the political establishment. Whether or not he understands the game well enough to do that, I don't know. Even if he does, there's still the question of whether or not he's audacious enough.