Helen Keller -
Her Socialist Years. Writings and Speeches
|
Friday, 6 January 2017
quote [ A senior U.S. intelligence official with direct knowledge confirmed to NBC News that the report on Russian hacking delivered to President Obama Thursday says the U.S. intercepted communications where senior Russian officials celebrated Donald Trump's win.
... The source described the intelligence about the celebration, first reported by the Washington Post, as a minor part of the overall intelligence report, which makes the case that Russia intervened in the election. ... The staffer, who has been briefed on the classified report, said that anyone who sees the evidence would be convinced. "What you will see is that there were evolving goals over time. At the end, they were trying to elect Trump," they said. ] We'll see how much competing news can cover this up.
Trump: Russian hacking controversy a 'witch hunt'
Former CIA director James Woolsey quits Trump transition team The declassified version has been released: Report: Putin, Russia Tried to Help Trump By 'Discrediting' Clinton Direct link to report (pdf): https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf Is this another distraction, or just a dick move? Donald Trump Orders Barack Obama Ambassadors to Quit by Inauguration Day
|
Kama-Kiri said @ 2:31am GMT on 7th January
Depends if you subscribe to the view that Wikileaks is back-ended by the Russian security services. If so, then sure: it's in your interests to disrupt, distress, and disarm communications you otherwise don't control and completely in line with their active measures program.
I have no clue whether wikileaks really is a Russian front, but... well, it would not surprise me to learn that what was once a legitimate group trying to keep democracies accountable has been usurped to become a Russian organ. I say that because they'd have been stupid not to make moves to bring it under their control - it's the perfect outlet to use to disrupt western governments after all - the only question in my mind is to what extent they were able to.
Kama-Kiri said @ 2:35am GMT on 7th January
Depends if you subscribe to the view that Wikileaks is back-ended by the Russian security services. If so, then sure: it's in your interests to disrupt, distress, and disarm communications you otherwise don't control and completely in line with their active measures program.
I have no clue whether wikileaks really is a Russian front**, but... well, it would not surprise me to learn that what was once a legitimate group trying to keep democracies accountable has been usurped to become a Russian organ. I say that because they'd have been stupid not to make moves to bring it under their control - it's the perfect outlet to use to disrupt western governments after all - the only question in my mind is to what extent they were able to.
**either it is, or the US intelligence is deliberately seeding the idea that it is, take your pick.
<-- Entry / Current Comment
Kama-Kiri said @ 2:31am GMT on 7th January
Depends if you subscribe to the view that Wikileaks is back-ended by the Russian security services. If so, then sure: it's in your interests to disrupt, distress, and disarm communications you otherwise don't control and completely in line with their active measures program.
I have no clue whether wikileaks really is a Russian front**, but... well, it would not surprise me to learn that what was once a legitimate group trying to keep democracies accountable has been usurped to become a Russian organ. I say that because they'd have been stupid not to make moves to bring it under their control - it's the perfect outlet to use to disrupt western governments after all - the only question in my mind is to what extent they were able to.
**either it is, or the US intelligence is deliberately seeding the idea that it is, take your pick.
