“Barr had put forward a ‘distorted...misleading’ account of the Mueller report findings...’These circumstances generally, and AG Barr’s lack of candor specifically, call into question Attorney General Barr’s credibility,’” Judge Walton wrote.
https://twitter.com/lrozen/status/1274917847467245569?s=20
New details from the Justice Department’s inquiry into Russian influence over the 2016 election released on Friday underscored President Trump’s keen interest in weaponizing information stolen by the Russians and funneled to WikiLeaks for use against his 2016 opponent, Hillary Clinton.
The new disclosures also emphasized prosecutors’ doubts about whether Mr. Trump told them the truth when he was questioned during the two-year investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into Russian interference in that election and whether the Trump campaign conspired with Moscow to influence its outcome.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/19/us/politics/mueller-report-redactions-roger-stone.html
"None of this is true. Stone claimed he had a source in Wikileaks - which was a FALSE CLAIM. It's June 2020 people. You've been at this for FOUR YEARS. When do Russiagaters finally find their rock bottom?
https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1275607324951019523
Never.
The Trump campaign tried to coordinate with Wikileaks through Roger Stone; -- A jury convicted Stone of lying to Congress to protect the President; -- The President now commutes Stone's sentence, sparing him from prison. Corruption and abuse of power.
https://twitter.com/eliehonig/status/1281743236181131264?s=20
"What we’re seeing today is an appalling overture ... from the president saying, ‘If you lie for me, if you cover up for me, I will reward you. On the other hand, if you are a rat and you cooperate then like a Mafia boss, I will come after you,"
"Roger Stone wasn't even ALLEGED BY HIS OWN PROSECUTORS to have conspired with Russia. Has that fact been made clear in the coverage of this commutation? Or is the media continuing to exploit the miasma of misinformation and hysteria that has always defined the Trump/Russia saga?"
How ironic that the poster who condemns "progressives" who consider the idea of voting for a "lesser evil" reasonable, is all in on the defence of one of the most disgusting right wing ratfuckers of the last 50 years. Shame on you, NDPP, for supporting Roger Stone.
Drivel. I don't support Roger Stone. Neither do I support endless idiotic Russiagate delusionals like you or our American friend.
"It's July 2020 and Chris Hayes is still peddling the conspiracy theory that Roger Stone was a go-between between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks! Does it matter that Mueller, Stone's trial, and every person involved refuted this fallacy?"
NDPP and his little cult mates, such as Aaron Mate, Michael Tracey and Jimmy Dore are living in a fantasy world in which the oligarchs who control the U.S. tried and failed to stop Trump from becoming president. If they had seriously wanted to stop him, he would not be president now.
They might have found a way to make him drop out. They might have arranged his accidental death. They would never, ever have tried to stop him in such an indirect and convoluted way. To say that they arranged a fake hack by Russian intelligence agencies in order to smear Trump by association is utterly ludicrous. It could only be believed by the most motivated of thinkers, suffering from massive confirmation bias.
Russia can never do any wrong.
Drivel. I don't support Roger Stone. Neither do I support endless idiotic Russiagate delusionals like you or our American friend.
"It's July 2020 and Chris Hayes is still peddling the conspiracy theory that Roger Stone was a go-between between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks! Does it matter that Mueller, Stone's trial, and every person involved refuted this fallacy?"
Stone's trial where he was found guilty?
As for Mueller:
We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term.
Liberals Are Crazy Idiots
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/07/11/liberals-are-crazy-idiots/
"...Liberals are such crazy idiots. They pretend to stand for truth and logic then spend years promoting the fact-free Trump-Russia collusion narrative."
By late 2016, the FBI had evidence that the Russians had signaled to a Trump campaign adviser that they could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Democratic candidate. And the FBI knew that the Russians had done just that: Beginning in July 2016, WikiLeaks released emails stolen by Russian military intelligence officers from the Clinton campaign. Other online personas using false names — fronts for Russian military intelligence — also released Clinton campaign emails.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/11/mueller-stone-oped/?arc404=true
More from Mueller:
A jury later determined he lied repeatedly to members of Congress. He lied about the identity of his intermediary to WikiLeaks. He lied about the existence of written communications with his intermediary. He lied by denying he had communicated with the Trump campaign about the timing of WikiLeaks’ releases. He in fact updated senior campaign officials repeatedly about WikiLeaks.
"Mary Trump claims Uncle Donald 'may have received tacit assurances from Russian president Vladimir Putin that Russia would do everything it could to swing the election. Read book..."
https://twitter.com/bears_with/status/1283327771972898819
'Dear Donald, please impose even more sanctions on my country and move even more NATO forces, missiles closer to Russia's borders etc. Of course you are our preferred president over the other corrupt old liar and warmonger and rest assured we will do everything we can to re-elect you. - Vlad.'
"Of one thing only can we be sure. We shall remain stupid.' - Voltaire
Why did he need tacit assurances when they broke in, stole and disseminated the DNC's emails. As Mueller found.
A porn star was paid to keep silent about her alleged dalliance years earlier with a presidential candidate, which a judge has agreed was an illegal violation of campaign finance laws.
The private emails of Democrats were stolen and published, which prosecutors have said was an illegal intervention into the U.S. political system by foreign operatives.
The two crimes were undertaken to help Donald Trump’s campaign in 2016. They led to the indictment or conviction of 13 men, including Trump’s personal attorney.
But for nearly four years, Trump has bullied, browbeaten and litigated his way out of efforts to pin down whether he had involvement in or knowledge of the illicit actions that were undertaken to help his presidential campaign.
Why did he need tacit assurances when they broke in, stole and disseminated the DNC's emails. As Mueller found.
It is absolutely clear that American law only lets US billionaires buy elections. This is a whole lot of distraction for the population while the globe is pillaged by the real powers, who actually spent way more time and money in getting the con-man elected.
Craig Murray: Cold Wars and Profit
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/07/cold-wars-and-profit/
"...You will recall the near incredible fact that even through the Mueller investigation, the FBI never inspected the DNC servers themselves but simply relied on a technical report from Crowdstrike, the Clinton related IT security consultant for the DNC. And now know for sure that Crowdstrike had been peddling fake news for Hillary. In fact, Crowdstrike had no record of any internet hack at all. There was no evidence of the email material being exported over the internet.
Remember the entire 'Russian hacking' story was based ONLY on Crowdstrike's say so. There is literally no other evidence of Russian involvement in the DNC emails, which is unsurprising as I have been telling you for 4 years from my own direct sources that Russia was not involved. Yet finally declassified Congressional testimony revealed that Shawn Henry stated on oath that 'we did not have concrete evidence' and 'there's circumstantial evidence but no evidence they were actually exfiltrated.' So arguably the biggest news story of the past 4 years, the claim that Putin effectively interfered to have Trump elected, turns out to be utterly baseless.
Has the mainstream media, acting on security service behest, done anyting to row back from the false impression it created? No it has doubled down. The 'Russian hacking' theme keeps being brought back related to whatever is the big issue of the day - Brexit? Russian hacking. UK General election 2019? Russian hacking. COVID-19 vaccine? Russian hacking. Finally, do not forget that there is a massive armaments industry and a massive security industry all dependent on having an 'enemy'. Powerful people make money from this Russophobia. Expect much more of it. There is money in a Cold War."
So, what does Murray propose was the actual sequence of events? It sounds to me as if he is saying that the Clinton campaign, at a time when they had a wide lead in the polls, and were expected by everyone to win (even Trump's campaign), decided that they needed a little extra excitement, so they faked a Russian hack, and leaked their own embarrassing emails. That sure sounds convincing.
I've posted exhaustively already on all of this and am not inclined to waste my time searching the threads for those who will never reconsider their own version borrowed from the DNC, NYT, WaPo, Guardian etc. Go search yourself if you've a mind. As for Craig Murray, the former British ambassador says he flew to Washington in September 2016 where he received a thumb drive containing the emails from one of the sources allegedly disgusted at the conduct of the Clinton campaign, the Clinton foundation and the manner in which the primary was manipulated against Bernie Sanders. Murray says the source had legal access to the information. Murray conveyed the leaked emails to WikiLeaks and the rest is history. It was always a leak never a hack and never a Russian hack. Bravos to Murray, WikiLeaks and all who continue to expose the dark hidden truths many of us refuse to admit or apparently prefer not to know.
So, then, after the data was leaked to Murray in September (and I'd really like to cross-examine him about this tale) the Clintonites decided to pretend the leak was actually a hack that happened nearly 6 months earlier. Do I have that right?
I should also note that the Washington Post reported on the DNC hack on June 14. Even if it was a lie, it was impressive that they could know at that time what would happen the following September. Bruce Schneier wrote about it the same day, and several times later that summer. He thought the Crowdstrike forensic analysis, which was already available, was well done, especially since it was all written more than 3 months before the leak supposedly happened. It seems Murray was a bit late to the party.
NDPP will never accept anything bad about Russia. You can wave all the facts and conclusions you want, it won't matter. The fact is that Russia hacked the DNC, stole the emails and distributed them.
NDPP will never accept anything bad about Russia. You can wave all the facts and conclusions you want, it won't matter. The fact is that Russia hacked the DNC, stole the emails and distributed them.
That is most likely the case although it still relies on US intelligence agencies, something I consider an oxymoron, for the information. However the US response is like a rapist complaining that someone grabbed their ass on a subway in an attempt to distract from the serial rapes they have committed around the globe.
NDPP will never accept anything bad about Russia. You can wave all the facts and conclusions you want, it won't matter. The fact is that Russia hacked the DNC, stole the emails and distributed them.
That is most likely the case although it still relies on US intelligence agencies, something I consider an oxymoron, for the information. However the US response is like a rapist complaining that someone grabbed their ass on a subway in an attempt to distract from the serial rapes they have committed around the globe.
That seems an apt analogy.
"Russiagate? It's a joke. Most of the world is just collapsing with laughter." - Chomsky-
"Russiagate? It's a joke. Most of the world is just collapsing with laughter." - Chomsky-
Great answer. That explains the timing problem completely.
So, then, after the data was leaked to Murray in September (and I'd really like to cross-examine him about this tale) the Clintonites decided to pretend the leak was actually a hack that happened nearly 6 months earlier. Do I have that right?
I have followed Craig Murray for some time he and he may get things wrong but I doubt he would deliberately lie.
It should cause pause that he could have been interrogated under oath when he offered in writing to testify before the massive Mueller inquiry but received no response as if irrelevant, despite the fact that a CIA contracted spy agency was "obsessed" with everything he did:
CIA ‘Obsessed’ With Former UK Envoy Who Will Testify in Spying-on-Assange Case
July 22, 2020
https://consortiumnews.com/2020/07/22/cia-obsessed-with-former-uk-envoy-...
Murray is no techy, relying a lot in the previously posted comment on Bill Binney, who has been saying much the same tthing for some time. Note that before Russiagate Scheneer had praised the Russia hacking dissenters Binney and Ray McGovern for knowing what they are talking about. As far as I know, Scheneer hasn't commented on or offered a response to the specific claims of Binney, though he regularly posts on Russiagate reportage from the mainstream as if it was impartial reporting. I think Scheneer is smart, well intentioned and often has good observations, but is not especially astute when it comes to the propaganda soup we all swim in.
It's certainly possible that Russia gained access to the server and I wouldn't be much surprised if they tried to thwart the election of the candidate with the hideous record as a bellicose hawk, it would likely seem to them to be in their interest. But given the probable shoddy security of the DNC servers which they never gave access to the FBI, even under the Obama administration, to examine the alleged crime scene. This is something basic but never officially pursued:
Direct access to the actual computers is the first requirement — the more so when an intrusion is termed “an act of war” and blamed on a nuclear-armed foreign government (the words used by the late Sen. John McCain and other senior officials). In testimony to the House Intelligence Committee in March 2017, former FBI Director James Comey admitted that he did not insist on physical access to the DNC computers even though, as he conceded, “best practices” dictate direct access....
https://consortiumnews.com/2019/03/13/vips-muellers-forensics-free-findi...
In short, the contrary arguments could both be true:
The DNC servers could have been compromised by persons and/or states, including Russia.
The data Wikileaks actually received could have been downloaded from a server by a disgruntled employee.
Objectively, how important is it where Wikileaks got the incriminating information? Unlike many unofficial "leaks" sown from security agencies, the information was never credibly claimed to be falsified. Any genuinely free press unsullied by partisanship or state subservience would publish the unpleasant publicly relevant facts of the exchanges regardless of source. That is what a genuine free press would do, and the content of the information would be foremost, not the messenger, whether it was provided by the Angel of Truth or Satan Himself (ie. Putin).
How many who are outraged at the publication of this material would also be outraged at a US spy agency that provided indisputable reportage of sordid internal political communications within Russia? The question is rhetorical because we all know the answer. The question itself would bring outrage or mockery because who can compare the actions of the "good guys" to those of the "bad guys". That is the level of cohesive tribal irrationalism that has not evolved since the emergence of humans.
Direct access to the actual computers is the first requirement — the more so when an intrusion is termed “an act of war” and blamed on a nuclear-armed foreign government (the words used by the late Sen. John McCain and other senior officials). In testimony to the House Intelligence Committee in March 2017, former FBI Director James Comey admitted that he did not insist on physical access to the DNC computers even though, as he conceded, “best practices” dictate direct access....
https://consortiumnews.com/2019/03/13/vips-muellers-forensics-free-findi...
In short, the contrary arguments could both be true:
The DNC servers could have been compromised by persons and/or states, including Russia.
The data Wikileaks actually received could have been downloaded from a server by a disgruntled employee.
I agree with your last observation that both versions could be true. Regarding the question of physical access to "the server", this is a complete canard. It is dismantled here by Kevin Poulsen.
tldr is that it was a network of "140 servers, most of them cloud-based". Cloud based means that they are virtual machines, running in the vast datacenters of Amazon, Google or Microsoft. No one knows or cares which of tens of thousands of rack-mounted servers actually hosts the virtual servers the DNC was using.
If that isn't enough for you, the gist:
The “server” Trump is obsessed with is actually 140 servers, most of them cloud-based, which the DNC was forced to decommission in June 2016 while trying to rid its network of the Russian GRU officers working to help Trump win the election, according to the figures in the DNC’s civil lawsuit against Russia and the Trump campaign. Another 180 desktop and laptop computers were also swapped out as the DNC raced to get the organization back on its feet and free of Putin’s surveillance.
But despite Trump’s repeated feverish claims to the contrary, no machines are actually missing.
It’s true that the FBI doesn’t have the DNC’s computer hardware. Agents didn’t sweep into DNC headquarters, load up all the equipment and leave Democrats standing stunned beside empty desks and dangling cables. There’s a reason for that, and it has nothing to do with a deep state conspiracy to frame Putin.
Trump and his allies are capitalizing on a basic misapprehension of how computer intrusion investigations work. Investigating a virtual crime isn’t a like investigating a murder. The Russians didn’t leave DNA evidence on the server racks and fingerprints on the keyboards. All the evidence of their comings and goings was on the computer hard drives, and in memory, and in the ephemeral network transmissions to and from the GRU’s command-and-control servers.
When cyber investigators respond to an incident, they capture that evidence in a process called “imaging.” They make an exact byte-for-byte copy of the hard drives. They do the same for the machine’s memory, capturing evidence that would otherwise be lost at the next reboot, and they monitor and store the traffic passing through the victim’s network. This has been standard procedure in computer intrusion investigations for decades. The images, not the computer’s hardware, provide the evidence.
Both the DNC and the security firm Crowdstrike, hired to respond to the breach, have said repeatedly over the years that they gave the FBI a copy of all the DNC images back in 2016. The DNC reiterated that Monday in a statement to the Daily Beast.
Greetings From the New Cold War: Russiagate, Nazis and the CIA
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/07/31/russiagate-nazis-and-the-cia/
"...That Russiagate is the continuation of a scheme launched in 1945 by the National Security Council, to be engineered by the CIA with help from former Nazi officers in its employ, speaks volumes about the Cold War frame from which it emerges. Its near instantaneous adoption by bourgeois liberals demonstrates the class basis of the right-wing nationalism it supports...."
And Russian interference on behalf of Trump is continuing in this election:
His Friday statement acknowledged that “Russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President Biden” and that “some Kremlin-linked actors are also seeking to boost President Trump’s candidacy on social media and Russian television.” For example, he noted that “pro-Russia Ukrainian parliamentarian Andriy Derkach is spreading claims about corruption — including through publicizing leaked phone calls — to undermine former Vice President Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party.” Left unstated is that Derkach has met repeatedly with Trump’s lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, as part of this effort, and that Sen. Ron Johnson (R.-Wis.) is now launching a politically motivated investigation based on the Russian propaganda against Biden.
Biden is corrupt. And even many Americans know and say it because it's true, not something the Kremlin made up. Under Donald Trump we have seen some of the most aggressive sanctions and anti-Russia foreign policy in history. This drivel is standard boilerplate American Democrat agit-prop that has long outlived its shelf-life and believability except among brainwashed Dem delusionals like yourself. If Russophobia is again to be the favoured strategy of your favourite party, it didn't wash last time and it surely won't again.
"Russiagate, it's a joke. The world world is laughing." - Chomsky
Interview with Chomsky, 24 April 2020: Noam Chomsky on Biden versus Trump: “Get rid of the malignancy [Trump] in the White House.”
Biden is corrupt. And even many Americans know and say it because it's true, not something the Kremlin made up. Under Donald Trump we have seen some of the most aggressive sanctions and anti-Russia foreign policy in history. This drivel is standard boilerplate American Democrat agit-prop that has long outlived its shelf-life and believability except among brainwashed Dem delusionals like yourself. If Russophobia is again to be the favoured strategy of your favourite party, it didn't wash last time and it surely won't again.
"Russiagate, it's a joke. The world world is laughing." - Chomsky
A non-denial denial is a statement that, at first hearing, seems to be a direct, clearcut and unambiguous denial of some alleged accusation, but after being parsed carefully turns out to not be a denial at all.
No Evidence of Foreign Interference in US Elections, US Intelligence Says
"Yesterday, the mislabeled US 'Intelligence' Agencies trotted out more nonsense claims about foreign interferences in US elections. The NYT sensationally headlines: 'Russia Continues Interfering in Election in Trying to Help Trump, US Intelligence Says.' But when one reads the piece itself one finds no fact that would support the 'Russia continues interfering' statement. The authors emphasize the scaremongering heresay from 'officials briefed on the intelligence' - ie Democratic Congress members - about Russia but have nothing to back it up..."
The Spies Who Hijacked America
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-spies-who-hijacked-america
"As a doctoral candidate at Cambridge working under 'FBI Informant' Stefen Halper, I had a front-row seat for Russiagate. The Cambridge Four, and their media and political enablers, did a miraculous job in pushing fake Trump-Russia conspiracy stories that undermined America's democratically elected government and sparked investigations still ripping us apart today. Perhaps nothing better illustrates the Cambridge Four's role - or is more urgent given Flynn's legal hearing August 11 - than the takedown of Trump's national security advisor.
In my work after 911 I saw how national security powers combined with unaccountable government officials could do things George Orwell never dreamed over. Russia and foreign interference in elections should be taken seriously. Yet pushing the threat of Russia - now a country with a GDP the CIA publicly estimates is far closer to Indonesia's than our own - like we are in the middle of a 1950's Red Scare push by Senator Joseph McCarthy, should not be used as a political weapon to cover up or excuse our own government officials' abuses. If Biden, Trump or members of their teams grossly abused national security powers to upend democracy, we deserve to know as soon as possible before the election. America can't afford another government and media strike out, after 4 years of too much denial, incompetence and cover up."
I wonder if Mr. Schrage is actually Q? I read the first 2,000 words of the article, and saw nothing resembling tangible evidence. Is there any of that in the rest of the article, or just more of Mr. Schrage's Sherlock Holmes impression?
You're a doubled-down Russiagate nutter. Of course you don't like it.
You're a doubled-down Russiagate nutter. Of course you don't like it.
What a substantive response. Just what a person with the facts on his side would say.
UK: The Russian Interference Report, Without Laughing
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/the-russian-interference-re...
"Now the madding crowd has moved on, I take a mature look at the report by the Intelligence and Security Committee on Russia. It is so flawed it is tempting simply to mock it. But in fact it is extremely dangerous. It calls expressly and repeatedly for the security services to be actively involved in 'policing the democratic space' and castigates the security services for their unwillingness to intefere in democratic process. In short the report is a real threat to democracy. Its evidence base is appalling, and that is what I shall look at first..."
The committee found that then-candidate Trump and senior campaign officials attempted to obtain advance information about WikiLeaks' release of damaging emails from Roger Stone, who they believed had inside information.
It was a leak not a hack and there was never any 'significant evidence to suggest' Wikileaks 'knowingly collaborated with Russian officials' either. This is simply double-down drivel derived from a failed preidential coup attempt, after a failed Dem election bid, by suborned officials, lying Dem partisans and the domestic intelligence agencies. Perhaps rather than perpetually chasing your tail attempting to re-make a conspiracy case now long discredited, you should instead peruse the actual emails themselves and contemplate something that is true - the frightening implications of the disgusting and corrupt US duopoly political culture you support and they reveal...
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/
Ray McGovern ( Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity) : Lack of a Hack For Dummies
https://raymcgovern.com/2020/08/05/lack-of-a-hack-for-dummies/
What? DNC Emails Not Hacked by Russia? Comedian Lee Camp explained it all three years ago. If you need some comic relief right away, feel free to avoid the turgid prose below and scroll down to the highlighted links below. The vast majority of Americans [like Josh] can be forgiven for still believing that Russia hacked the DNC emails and gave them to WikiLeaks. This is largely because they have no way of knowing that Shawn Henry, head of the Cyber company CrowdStrike which the DNC hired to do the forensics on the DNC computers, has admitted that there was/is no concrete evidence that these DNC emails were hacked - by Russia or by anyone else..."
Some details about the day of the Access Hollywood tape/Podesta emails release: Trump campaign team heard about the tape an hour before its release. Stone told Corsi to get Assange to "drop the Podesta emails immediately." WikiLeaks did so 30 min after tape published.
https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1295723474045083648?s=20
WikiLeaks/Assange has long maintained Russia was not the source of the hacked Democratic materials. But the committee says it "found significant evidence to suggest that, in the summer of 2016, WikiLeaks was knowingly collaborating with Russian government officials.”
https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1295719866708754436?s=20
This is simply double-down drivel derived from a failed preidential coup attempt, after a failed Dem election bid, by suborned officials
Are you sure you're not head of the Republican National Committee?
You can deny all you want but it has been established multiple times, most conclusively in the Mueller report and indictments, that the DNC was hacked.
VIPS: Memorandum To Speaker Pelosi: Did Russia Hack the DNC Emails?
https://twitter.com/raymcgovern/status/1290355909776953344
"The narrative that Russia hacked Democratic National Committee emails in 2016 and gave them to WikiLeaks to hurt Hillary Clinton's candidacy has become an article of faith for about half of Americans [including Josh] - somewhat fewer than the number misled into believing 18 years ago that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - but it is still considerable. It turns out the accusation was fabricated - just like the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, some of the same US officials were involved in both deceptions..."
See, WMDs was fabricated. Therefore, Russia did not hack the DNC. Impeccable logic.
Putin ordered the 2016 hacking of Democratic Party accounts and the release of emails intended to harm Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded
Moscow’s intent was to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee,
https://twitter.com/business/status/1295734372755214338?s=20
"The new Senate report is of a part with the US indictment of Assange: a malicious propaganda effort designed to bury a trailblazing media organization for embarrassing the US government and exposing its crimes. Thread..."
https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1295826237668065280
'Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.' - Voltaire
