U.S. Politics

[HanoiVillan]

13 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

In your opinion, what happens if, on Thursday/Friday without doubt it is clear that Russia was behind it? What does Trump? I think he has potentially backed himself into a hole.

Although I agree with your bolded, I think the way he has gone about it is ridiculous. He could have quietly downplayed it, but instead he praises Putin, doubles down by labeling his own services as "intelligence" and sides with Assange. I'd argue he hasn't kept his options open at all. He's 100% denied any Russian involvement.

It makes me really wonder if he's as intelligent as you think or a loud mouth who can't keep it shut.

It will never be 'clear' that Russia did it (as in, it may or may not be clear to experts, but for the public, any claim that Russia is responsible can be met by a counter-claim from another source and any evidence will be far too technical for 99% of the public to understand) so he isn't really in a hole. 

I do agree that he's committed himself to a position and I don't for one second think he will change it. He wants his first foreign policy action to be a big, pleasing thaw in relations with Russia and he's not going to change that plan unless something very very drastic happens. 

[Awol]

17 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

In your opinion, what happens if, on Thursday/Friday without doubt it is clear that Russia was behind it? What does Trump? I think he has potentially backed himself into a hole.

Although I agree with your bolded, I think the way he has gone about it is ridiculous. He could have quietly downplayed it, but instead he praises Putin, doubles down by labeling his own services as "intelligence" and sides with Assange. I'd argue he hasn't kept his options open at all. He's 100% denied any Russian involvement.

It makes me really wonder if he's as intelligent as you think or a loud mouth who can't keep it shut.

I agree with you he'd be in trouble. Not because he wouldn't be prepared to let it go and start again with a clean slate, but because major Republican figures like McCain would go ape and (more importantly) Obama still has time to do something major in response. The obvious choice would be finally agreeing to arm Ukraine, which can be done very very quickly.

[OutByEaster?]

6 minutes ago, Awol said:

The obvious choice would be finally agreeing to arm Ukraine, which can be done very very quickly.

And would suit exactly what the US intelligence community has been attempting there for a long time - completion of the Ukrainian revolution to the standard CIA pattern. It's be a complicated way to get there, but I wouldn't put it past them - 'the Russians spoiled the election' would be plenty of excuse.

 

 

[blandy]

Re the hacking. I saw a thing in one of the papers - maybe the Times, detailing how the Netherlands agencies had traced the hacker to a criminal group operating in Russia. They'd basically infiltrated them. The gist of the article was that the hackers were criminals to whom a blind eye was turned by the Russian authorities on the condition they didn't hack anyone in Russia and from time to time conducted work for the Russian authorities themselves.

There will never be a smoking gun, because it wouldn't be in the longer term interest of the USA to show how they know who did it. I think everyone knows it was the Russians, all the talk is just playing the game. Even Putin's non response to the US expulsion of 35 Russian "diplomats" is basically a nod and wink.

[StefanAVFC]

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

The bolded is **** terrifying. The big question must be, what evidence does he have to trust Assange over 17 US intelligence agencies? He told us he'd tell us yesterday or today, so let's wait and see *snigger*

(1:05)

 

I was so excited too

[Davkaus]

I like "the trump transition". It sounds like an innovative way to disguise it was you that dropped one in a crowded room.

[tonyh29]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

Re the hacking. I saw a thing in one of the papers - maybe the Times, detailing how the Netherlands agencies had traced the hacker to a criminal group operating in Russia. They'd basically infiltrated them. The gist of the article was that the hackers were criminals to whom a blind eye was turned by the Russian authorities on the condition they didn't hack anyone in Russia and from time to time conducted work for the Russian authorities themselves.

There will never be a smoking gun, because it wouldn't be in the longer term interest of the USA to show how they know who did it. I think everyone knows it was the Russians, all the talk is just playing the game. Even Putin's non response to the US expulsion of 35 Russian "diplomats" is basically a nod and wink.

I read a different source but it quoted a cyber security firm who seemed to be saying they traced it right down to the IP address and to a specific group with known Russian affiliations ... they concluded whilst you can not categorically say it was  the Russians ... it was the Russians 

[villakram]

Identifying bad guys via their IP address... OK.

[Davkaus]

It does seem fair to point out that even if the hackers were russian (lol at the IP address being proof), it doesn't necessarily mean it was a hack by Russia, surely?

I mean, Gary McKinnon hacked NASA and the US military, it wasn't a state-sponsored attack by the UK (well...probably not).

I'd expect there to be a bit more evidence than that.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Davkaus

[Chindie]

I'd **** love it if McKinnon was state sponsored. GCHQ searching for alien secrets by proxy, awesome.

[Davkaus]

In the old days, I bet Dubya wouldn't have been able to resist putting his arm around Tony's shoulder and giving him a tour of Area 51.

RIP the special relationship. 

[Chindie]

Perhaps Trump can tweet something...

Dulce is REAL!!!

****. It'd make my year. Hell, it'd make my life.

 

[tonyh29]

31 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It does seem fair to point out that even if the hackers were russian (lol at the IP address being proof), it doesn't necessarily mean it was a hack by Russia, surely?

I mean, Gary McKinnon hacked NASA and the US military, it wasn't a state-sponsored attack by the UK (well...probably not).

I'd expect there to be a bit more evidence than that.

There is a lot more i was just sorta confirming another source agreeing with Blandys post... 

i made a mistake with the IP thing but heck I was watching TV whilst listening to a conversation so cut me some slack but essentially the same source of the DNC hack was the same source that hacked Ukrainian military software used for GPS positioning  of troops and D-30 howitzers .. Ukraine lost 80% of these howitzers ...if not Russia then  who else do you think it might be or do you think that's just a coincidence ?

 

[StefanAVFC]

Quote

President-elect Donald Trump is crafting plans to restructure at least two of the nation’s top intelligence agencies, according to a new report.

Trump is eyeing overhauls of the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

“The view from the Trump team is the intelligence world [is] becoming completely politicized,” an individual close to Trump’s transition operation said. "They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring agencies and how they interact."

Trump is targeting the CIA and the ODNI as he publicly wars with the U.S. intelligence community over its conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/intelligence/312759-trump-to-revamp-intelligence-agencies-report

So the plan is to overhaul the CIA, calling it 'completely politicised', yet ignore the FBI whose director came dangerously close to violating, or violated the Hatch Act. 

Consistent as ever Donald.

[maqroll]

The Intelligence agencies are fuming over this. Trump is really playing a rather dangerous game. My instinct would tell me to establish a good working relationship at the start...for Trump it's a scorched earth policy. He's a fool. He will make enemies of not only the Dems and Intel and most other govt. agencies, but he'll make enemies of ranking Republicans too. He's already burning bridges. Not smart, unless he plans on trying to burn it all down.

[mjmooney]

41 minutes ago, maqroll said:

The Intelligence agencies are fuming over this. Trump is really playing a rather dangerous game. My instinct would tell me to establish a good working relationship at the start...for Trump it's a scorched earth policy. He's a fool. He will make enemies of not only the Dems and Intel and most other govt. agencies, but he'll make enemies of ranking Republicans too. He's already burning bridges. Not smart, unless he plans on trying to burn it all down.

 

[Davkaus]

Pissing off the CIA. What could possibly go wrong.

Back and to the left.

[Awol]

47 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Pissing off the CIA. What could possibly go wrong.

Back and to the left.

Tangent alert. Most Brits and I'd say most Europeans wouldn't seriously entertain the thought of a Prime Minister or President being assassinated by their own national intelligence agencies. 

When it comes to the US and the CIA it's almost an entrenched public belief that doing something like that is at least a possibility.

That can't be a good thing in a democracy and asks bigger questions about the US agencies, their role, power and relationship to the country they protect. 

Sorry, carry on.. 

[Awol]

On 04/01/2017 at 21:14, Awol said:

I'd expect 'leaks' to be all over the US media in the period between those two briefings. 

Didn't realize the Senate were having a hearing on the hacking today, so not media leaks but a full broadside from three intelligence chiefs and John McCain. 

Trump seems to have countered on Twitter with"that's not what Wikileaks said!"

Think there is a full report out next week covering Russian interference via cyber, disinformation and propaganda.

One of the Senate committee made that point that the US has made 81 documented attempts to interfere with foreign elections since WW2, not including coups and revolutions. "There are plenty of bricks to throw around this big glass house", or words to that effect. 

A fair point. 

[Rodders]

Indeed. Plenty of South n Central Americans possibly laughing their tits off at US complaining about electoral interference. Interference which didn't alter the vote ( well according to the Clapper chap, notwithstanding his track record on honesty )