[PJ] It appears that the intelligence community and counter-intelligence community are at odds over discerning motives for the Russians hacking of DNC emails and other efforts at hacking the election.
The CIA offered an assessment that Russia "quite" clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House. But the FBI was far more circumspect in its analysis, giving rise to confusion on Capitol Hill.
Washington Post:
During a similar Senate Intelligence Committee briefing held the previous week, the CIA’s statements, as reflected in the letter the lawmakers now held in their hands, were "direct and bald and unqualified" about Russia’s intentions to help Trump, according to one of the officials who attended the House briefing.
The FBI official’s remarks to the lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee were, in comparison, "fuzzy" and "ambiguous," suggesting to those in the room that the bureau and the agency weren’t on the same page, the official said.
The divergent messages from the CIA and the FBI put a spotlight on the difficulty faced by intelligence and law enforcement officials as they try to draw conclusions about the Kremlin’s motives for hacking Democratic Party emails during the 2016 race. Officials are frequently looking at information that is fragmentary. They also face issues assessing the intentions of a country expert at conducting sophisticated "influence" operations that made it hard -- if not impossible -- to conclusively detect the Kremlin’s elusive fingerprints.
The competing messages, according to officials in attendance, also reflect cultural differences between the FBI and the CIA. The bureau, true to its law enforcement roots, wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something beyond all reasonable doubt. The CIA is more comfortable drawing inferences from behavior.
"The FBI briefers think in terms of criminal standards -- can we prove this in court," one of the officials said. "The CIA briefers weigh the preponderance of intelligence and then make judgment calls to help policymakers make informed decisions. High confidence for them means ’we’re pretty damn sure.’ It doesn’t mean they can prove it in court."
The FBI is not sold on the idea that Russia had a particular aim in its meddling. "There’s no question that [the Russians’] efforts went one way, but it’s not clear that they have a specific goal or mix of related goals," said one U.S. official.
The murky nature of the assessments is maddening many lawmakers who are demanding answers about the Kremlin’s role in the presidential race. The FBI, under Director James B. Comey, is already under fire for dropping a bombshell letter days before the election on the discovery of new emails potentially related to the Clinton private server investigation. The emails proved irrelevant to the case. On Saturday, outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called on Comey to resign, saying the FBI director deliberately kept quiet evidence about Russia’s motives before the election.
It's hard to avoid the conclusion that the CIA has a political motivation for being certain about Russian government interference. After all, if the CIA is right, the reason for losing wasn't that the Democrats fielded the absolute worst candidate for president in their history. Instead, those mean Russians who gave Donald Trump surreptitious support are responsible for the Dems' debacle.
#2
So if Russia was trying to help Trump why didn't the CIA etc. stop them? Or say something? I guess maybe they didn't want Hillary to win either? Then again, why in the world would Russia prefer Trump to Clinton?
#4
Rhinos such as McCain are in on this scam investigation. DHS claimed to be involved with all states but two, one of which Georgia had third party security which detected only the DHS trying to hack the system after the election.
Corrupt feds are scheming to find some way to stay in power against the will of the people.
#7
This reminds me of Cold War reds under beds scares.
Overseas help was overwhelmingly for Hillary.
And if you want to draw any conclusion from this, its that the Russians under Putin were more astute than almost everyone else, having picked the winning horse.
[Wash Times] As recently as Nov. 17, James Clapper, the nation’s top intelligence officer, told Congress his agencies "don’t have good insight" into a direct link between Wikileaks and the emails supposedly hacked by a Russian operation from Democrats and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
During the campaign, Wikileaks released reams of embarrassing internal emails between campaign chairman John Podesta, other campaign officials and the Democratic National Committee. One emailed showed candidate Clinton was provided the questions ahead of a CNN town hall appearance.
Democrats are now on a campaign implying that the hacking won the election for Donald Trump and have pressed the Obama administration for a far reaching investigation.
The Washington Post reported Friday that the CIA has secretly concluded that the Vladimir Putin regime directed hackers to penetrate the Democrats’ emails expressly to help Republican Trump win the election. The Post said the CIA has identified people with connections to the Russia government who supplied the stolen emails to Wikileaks.
That is not what Mr. Clapper, the director of national intelligence, told the House Intelligence Committee at an open hearing on Nov. 17.
Asked about Russia and Wikileaks, Mr. Clapper said, "As far as the WikiLeaks connection, the evidence there is not as strong and we don’t have good insight into the sequencing of the releases or when the data may have been provided. We don’t have as good insight into that."
#4
I still think that a disgruntled DNC партком person(s), perhaps of the Bernie persuasion, was responsible for the Donk Central Committee email leaks, not the russkies.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
12/11/2016 8:10 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Maybe Wikileaks has some evidence to back up the Dem claims?
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/11/2016 8:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I think a Keystone Cops graphic might be more appropriate for this post.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/11/2016 11:00 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The dems have painted themselves in a corner on this one. They had no problem with barky ignoring intelligence briefings, but they will screech if Trump discounts CIA emanations. Hypocrites always...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/11/2016 11:12 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Wikileaks has evidence of Dem corruption that they must censor and ban at all costs....
Posted by: One Eyed Speaking for Boskone7919 ||
12/11/2016 11:52 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Maybe Wikileaks has some evidence to back up the Dem claims?
Posted by Bobby
The Dems won't be on the dance floor with Wikileaks anytime soon.
#10
#7 The dems have painted themselves in a corner on this one. They had no problem with barky ignoring intelligence briefings, but they will screech if Trump discounts CIA emanations. Hypocrites always...
Posted by: M. Murcek 2016-12-11 11:12
M. Murcek,
Perhaps I've heard one too many conspiracy theories, but maybe this is a stoke of genius on Trump's part:
1. "We'll tell Trump in the briefings that we've got vague concerns about Russian hacking. Then we'll go public saying 'Trump knew' but hasn't done anything about it. Makes him look bad."
2. Trump says, "Sorry. I only want specific briefings, and we'll tell you which ones," or, "I'll let you know when I want to hear the brief."
3. Dems/CIA: "How can we discredit or undermine Trump if he won't cooperate??? We'll tell everybody that there's a direct link!!"
4. "Really? Told POTUS yet? Gimme details."
5. "Ummmmmm....sorry, don't have good insight. Magic 8-ball says 'Ask me again later.'"
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/11/2016 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
#11
My guess (and only a guess) is Trump has already established his own intelligence fusion and reporting cell. Getting a weekly Klingon dump (or as often as needed - they're only an hour away) verifies or refutes his own cell.
Under the existing circumstances and track record, that's what most of us would do.
"FBI is saying evidence isn’t there. And this isn’t about the vote itself, it’s about the DNC hack. Which had already been claimed, before the election, so we factored it or didn’t in our votes already. So what Democratic attempt is actually giving Russia what they want- a vehicle by which to attack our elections."
#5
OS, thanks for posting. CD3 is where my peeps are from. Very American, heavily armed, yet surprisingly feminist. If you get a trigger warning, they're not kidding.
Posted by: Matt ||
12/11/2016 14:09 Comments ||
Top||
[Iran Press TV] The Sick Man of Europe Turkey ...the only place on the face of the earth that misses the Ottoman Empire.... 's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has presented a bill to the parliament, which would change the country’s constitution and expand President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ... Turkey's version of Mohammed Morsi but they voted him back in so they deserve him... ’s powers. The package would also bring structural changes to Turkey's security and judiciary. The Turkish legislature’s second- and third-biggest parties, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP), both oppose the intended constitutional reforms.
Anthony Hall, editor-in-chief of American Herald Tribune, believes this is yet another move to transform Turkey into a one-man rule, adding that the Turkish government is acting according to the "Israeli written playbook".
"This is an ongoing trajectory. Erdogan is emerging as a Sultan Erdogan. It is a dictatorship. Turkey is emerging as a dictatorship. We see a crackdown on universities, on judiciary, on public servants especially on the Kurds," the analyst told Press TV.
"It is becoming clear that the playbook here, the script seems to be the war on terror. Anybody who you do not like, any dissent, you just put this word of terror or terrorism on them," he added.
Hall further stated Erdogan definitely enjoys support among many Turks. However, a poor excuse is better than no excuse at all... he argued, it remains to be seen whether the failed July 15 military coup attempt in Turkey was "authentic" or it was in fact engineered to give the pretext to Ankara do these actions.
This comes as Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim has said that Ankara continues "to work on changing the system to ensure instability is removed from Turkey's political history absolutely."
The Turkish prime minister further said that the bill would protect Turkey against any future coup attempt.
Turkey has been on high security alert following the failed coup attempt as well as a string of terrorist attacks that have hit the country over the past year.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/11/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11124 views]
Top|| File under: Sublime Porte
#1
The parliamentary action is a mere formality. They have already arrived.
[Huff Poo] WASHINGTON ― President-elect Donald Trump will nominate John Bolton to be the nation’s No. 2 diplomat, handling day-to-day operations at the State Department, according to NBC’s Andrea Mitchell and confirmed to HuffPost by a source close to the transition.
Extreme, baby!
Bolton, who had been on Trump’s short list for secretary of state at one point, is among the most hawkish members of the Republican foreign policy community, a bellicose enemy of Russia and Iran.
He is a former acting U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, but served less than two years, as Democrats banded together to block his long-term appointment. His time at the U.N. was marked by a rapid uptick in anti-American sentiment among the global diplomatic community. Bolton remains one of the most disliked foreign policy operators on the world stage.
Trump’s search for State Department leadership has been particularly dramatic. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was in the running, and then he bowed out on Friday. The GOP’s 2012 presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, was also considered. But media outlets reported Saturday that Trump had settled on Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson for the top State Department job.
Even as the second in command at State, Bolton is an aggressive selection from Trump, shattering the president-elect’s pledge to work peacefully with other countries. Bolton, who has called for the bombing of Iran, held high-level roles in three different Republican administrations between 1998 and 2006. He is now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank whose vice president has described Trump as "an idiot."
#4
As I look at the Trump administration nominees as a group, I become more and more convinced that he will have to at some point, neuter or destroy the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). Trump's mission and the AFGE appear to be diametrically opposed.
The AFGE is the largest federal employee union representing 650000 federal and D.C. government workers. I fear Trump's greatest challenges to success lie ahead.
#5
Bolton is good. He doesn't have to fire the people in the State Dept. Bureaucracy, he can transfer individuals strategically to places where their careers are in a trailer next to a dumpster. Some will get the message or they are next. Break up clusters and don't rehire is another method. Lots of ways to encourage people to leave.
Then replace or don't fill the vacancy whichever is more effective. Funding is another way. Starve and strangle an individual uncooperative dept. and leave it to turn in the wind. Union personnel have to have a power base..look and identify. Apply pressure and keep it up. A lot you can do in the next 8 years. Don't be concerned about being "liked". Win and reward your Values among the ones who support them. Create an environment. Organize and create a wave.
If you don't fight you better learn to suck. Better to fight. No prisoners.
#7
One little problem about getting Bolton confirmed: Senator Rand Paul.
"I'll do whatever it takes to stop someone like John Bolton being secretary of state," said Paul; opposing Bolton and perhaps Giuliani "would include all of the tools, would include the filibuster as well, but I hate to prematurely offer that up."
You only need 51 votes - Thank You Harry Reid for that. 52 GOP senators. If the Dems stick together, and just one RINO joins Paul and the Dems, Nomination is DOA.
#8
FYI - latest tweet Paul say "ANY Position", not just SoS.
Here's the recent quote: “I think John Bolton is so far out of it, and has such a naïve understanding of the world, if he were to be the assistant or the undersecretary for Tillerson, I’m an automatic ‘No’ on Bolton,” Sen. Rand Paul said of President-elect Donald Trump’s reported choice for Deputy Secretary of State.
“He should get nowhere close to the State Department, if anybody with a sane worldview is in charge,” Paul continued.
Something sure has Rand's panties in a wad when it comes to Bolton. This has got to be something personal to be this petty. Pres Elect Trump needs to call him to the Trump Tower and talk some sense into him. NY Style.
#9
So, is George Voinovich, deceased senator from Ohio spinning in his grave, or mere weeping again?
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/11/2016 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Trump, along with Pence, Newt, Huckabee, Giuliani, and a few others are taking the long view, the strategic view. They're setting America up for success well beyond themselves, or many of the others. I just hope and pray we can stay the course.
#13
My respect for Rand Paul and his panties is diminishing.
I have two theories:
1) Trump is picking these people to flush out the opposition as whiny little bitches and make their heads explode.
2) Trump is determined to succeed in his new job and is picking people to help him do that, regardless of the traditional paybacks and patronage system.
#14
Bolton remains one of the most disliked foreign policy operators on the world stage.
Because he puts US interests first, last, & always. Let them hate us as long as they fear us. And put a big poster of the "Darth Bolton" pic about every 10 feet in the State Dept. hallways.
#19
"Extreme Militant". Wear that Huffpo badge proudly
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/11/2016 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
#20
The SoS Tillerson nominee is solid, will carry out negotiations and policies, etc. Good background for the job. But where to put Bolton? I think this is the perfect place for him - operations, not policy. Bolton can clean house at State. He's just the black-and-white kind of guy you need wielding an axe in that overgrown thicket of progressivism and careerism that State has become.
#21
I'm thinking a lot of housecleaning... $6 Billion lost worth
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/11/2016 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#22
1) Trump is picking these people to flush out the opposition as whiny little bitches and make their heads explode.
2) Trump is determined to succeed in his new job and is picking people to help him do that, regardless of the traditional paybacks and patronage system.
Yes and yes. My Facebook feed is full of Democrats/Liberals/Progressives and NeverTrumper Republicans outraged that Mr. Tillerson "has been picked." When I point out that he has not been picked, that the various reports that he is the front runner are based on Trump Tower elevator watching and anonymous sources who may well be nothing more than the hotel cleaning staff, they wax indignant that Mr. Trump would even dare consider such persons for the job.
They're going to drive themselves to nervous breakdowns before the man is even sworn into office.
#25
Call the NSA and get all the emails of the Rhinos to their mistresses and such. That'll help get rid of the opposition. (Where have I seen this before?)
[The Hill] Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Saturday he has concerns about the possibility of Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson being nominated for secretary of State, given his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"I don’t know what Mr. Tillerson’s relationship with Vladimir Putin was, but I’ll tell you it is a matter of concern to me," McCain said in an interview with Fox News. NBC News reported earlier on Saturday that President-elect Donald Trump had settled on Tillerson to head the State Department, though the transition team has not confirmed the report.
McCain is the first Republican to raise questions about the potential nomination, and Tillerson could fail to make it through the confirmation process if just three GOP senators join a united Democratic opposition.
"I’d have to examine it," McCain said of the potential nomination. "You want to give the president of the United States the benefit of the doubt because the people have spoken. But Vladimir Putin is a thug, bully and a murderer, and anybody else who describes him as anything else is lying."
#4
WHAT 'relationship" to Putin? Spell it out, clown. Open your book and read us the evidence, not the innuendo.
Sound like self interest and BS to me, Mr. McCain.
You aren't exactly a winner in the "relationship" venue, yourself, you know. i seem to remember something about Syria with your name on it.
I see you as a politician on the outs and am not in any hurry to listen. Get some rest.
[WAPO who else?] THE WEEK started with a hopeful sign for those concerned about climate change: Former vice president Al Gore met with Donald Trump for about 90 minutes on Monday, leading some to believe that the president-elect might be ready to accept facts and evidence. By the end of the week, however, Mr. Trump had selected Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mr. Pruitt wrote this in National Review in May: "Global warming has inspired one of the major policy debates of our time. That debate is far from settled. Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged -- in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress. It should not be silenced with threats of prosecution. Dissent is not a crime."
Dissent, indeed, is not a crime, and acknowledging the uncertainties in climate forecasts is reasonable. But rejecting or playing down the near-unanimous warnings of experts, which are based on decades of substantial and continually accumulating evidence and suggest vast implications for future generations, should disqualify a nominee from leading an expert agency charged with making science-based decisions. Among scientists there is virtually no dissent
Oh yes there is...
from the conclusion that human activity -- the burning of fossil fuels, which releases heat-trapping gases that stay in the atmosphere -- is leading to planetary warming, and that the coming changes pose severe risks.
No doubt we would disagree with Mr. Pruitt on any number of issues. He is a leading voice against the Clean Power Plan, President Obama’s centerpiece climate policy. Even before his nomination, the New York Times had uncovered extremely close ties between Mr. Pruitt and the oil and gas industry. He has been tapped to run an agency much of whose work he believes should cease.
We might not oppose Mr. Pruitt’s nomination based on these differences. There are legitimate arguments, based in states’ rights and concerns over overregulation, against the Obama administration’s assertive application of clean water and clean air laws. A president is entitled to advisers, if they are qualified, who reflect his views.
#3
If the [settled] science of polling cannot predict a Trump win over Hillary one day in advance, how can meteorological science forecast years in advance?
The term "settled science" is a PC dogmatic catch phrase equivalent to "the world is flat".
Darwinism slow evolution was "settled science" until the big bang theory evolved to replace it.
"Global warming" evolved into "climate change".
One day "settled climate change" will evolve into duh, yeah the climate does change! But the climate change will be as unpredictable as a presidential election.
#6
Some are convinced we buggered the litmus test (and law) regarding citizenship for the highest office in the land. I don't see the harm in a Climate Change denier. To borrow a boring phrase, 'Fair and balanced.'
#10
20-30 years ago, a Scientific American article showed (I think) 11,000-year cycles of warming/cooling, based on orbital cycles. The author supposed global warming started 8,000 years ago, with agriculture and - yes, you knew it! - cow ... ummm... methane.
But, the author observed without this man-made (and domesticated animal) climate change, we would now be smack in the middle of an ice age.
Thank heaven for cows! And they make beef.
Posted by: Bobby ||
12/11/2016 8:18 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Walk down just as far as the corner without a jacket. Then tell me about Global Warming.
Its BS and always was. It used to be Global Cooling 20 years ago. That was BS too.
What is is REALLY about is CONTROL. And Manipulation.
People are not stupid....like I say..walk down to the Corner without your jacket.
#12
And political hacks who have no experience or contract with the military culture should ever be appointed as SecDef, but that hasn't stopped you before.
#15
Many people die of dihydrogen monoxide every year worldwide. It is an alarming and significant problem that needs to be studied to understand this phenomenon and to try to prevent these needless these deaths.
#16
I believe the concept that human activity increases atmospheric CO2 is settled science. And that increased atmospheric CO2 creates more retained heat is settled science.
What is NOT settled is 'how much increase?' Or what other linked changes occur? Or 'is it good, or bad?'
What is not science is 'can we really stop it?' Or are we even interested in the 'science' of it, or just the politics?
#17
I guess that makes me a "Denier", Glen. I think we have too many cooked data reports, too many bad models, and grant-whores who subsist on "a new Ice Age" "Global Warmening" "Climate Change".
REAL Science™ doesn't try to shut down debate, hide data and mods, argue that the other side is "unethical or immoral" for questioning theory and results
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/11/2016 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Sorry Glen. The fact that climate changes, and has been for millions of years is what is pretty much settled science.
The idea that mankind is responsible for Climate Change is what is most definately *not* settled.
The climate people are taking the settled science of climate change and attempting to apply it to the idea that it's mankind caused.
Kind of like the assertion that if you are against people who violate our borders then you are against immigrants. Entirely unrelated issues but they assert that they are the same.
The fact that climate change has been happening long before we climbed out of the trees [to free our hands for other uses...] is never mentioned. And that the data is bludgeoned until it meets their pre-determined conclusions makes their 'studies' irrelevant.
President Obama is right — if President-elect Donald Trump succeeds, America succeeds. But the opposite is equally true. The costs of a failed Trump presidency would be profound for the security of the United States and countries around the world.
With each passing day, we grow increasingly concerned that President-elect Trump fails to grasp the solemn, serious responsibilities that come with being our nation’s commander in chief. Protecting and advancing our national security interests is arguably the president’s most important duty.
As elected representatives of a separate and co-equal branch of government, we are honor-bound by our oaths to protect and defend the Constitution. We will also offer our advice and opinions to the president and share these views with the American people, particularly when it concerns our national security. And there is much to be concerned about.
First, Donald J. Trump will pledge to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States when he takes the oath of office on Jan. 20. But by any objective measure, the president-elect is on a collision course with the Constitution, which states that federal office holders cannot receive monetary gifts or otherwise financially benefit from foreign governments or affiliates.
But Trump’s company and its many dealings stand in direct conflict with this prohibition. Trump has announced he will address his future with his business empire next week, and we expect nothing less than an utterly clear, concrete, black-and-white decision that prevents any actual or perceived conflict with the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.
Second, Trump is treating the secretary of State nomination like a reality television show.
When it comes to the selection of our nation’s chief diplomat, we expect Trump to nominate someone who possesses unquestioned expertise, experience and judgment — not a political loyalist or ideological firebrand, characteristics of many of the individuals already surrounding the president-elect.
Finally, we have been alarmed by the cavalier manner in which the president-elect appears to be approaching his initial interactions with foreign heads of state and other political leaders, potentially setting the stage for multiple diplomatic crises that could easily escalate.
In his calls with foreign leaders, President-elect Trump has unnerved our partners, raised questions about U.S. commitments and even reportedly expressed tacit support for extrajudicial killings. Moreover, in preparing for these conversations he has ignored experts in U.S. intelligence agencies and the State Department.
Indeed, we find it particularly troubling that President-elect Trump has mostly declined to take the daily intelligence briefing. Presidents and presidents-elect going back decades have begun their day this way — understanding national security threats and opportunities, asking probing questions, and making tough decisions.
The information and analysis that our intelligence community provides to decision-makers is invaluable for developing a full and nuanced picture of the world.
Candidate Trump’s comments on an array of foreign policy issues were disturbing at best and frightening at worst. This conduct cannot become the norm.
At stake is America’s role as a global superpower: building coalitions, fostering development, combating disease, fighting terrorism, upholding democratic institutions and values, and filling leadership voids where other nations come up short.
We do not yet know how President-elect Trump will treat these issues once he occupies the Oval Office, but we have little optimism at this time based on what he has presented thus far.
Provocative tweets might satisfy a political base, but they do nothing to advance the national security interests of the United States. On the contrary, such missives could lead to serious misunderstandings with our allies and potential conflicts with our adversaries.
#5
Why does media even give these people airtime. I pay no attention to them and long for the greater potential prospects to come presented in a new media. PBS, ESPN, CNN, MSN, NBC, ABC the long goodbye.
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/11/2016 8:02 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I pay no attention to them
Go 'em one better. Cut the cord and stop paying for them. I canceled DirecTV and stopped subsidizing the NBA and NFL kneelers on ESPN in the bargain. Win-win-win-WIN!
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/11/2016 8:08 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Propaganda BS
Trump's picks are good ones. Bolton as Exec at State Dept is particularly good. He knows the system from the git-go. He will hit the ground running. State Dept. NEEDS a house cleaning. They behaved like tools for Clinton.
Bolton has strong Values. And a few Generals in the Cabinet is a good thing. The Left needs to see it...and feel it.
#15
Wikileaks: It seems that the building(Premise Data/T&C) they are using is owned by CBRE. The name on the public records is Mark Raggio. Mark Raggio is the First Vice President of CBRE. CBRE seems to be the real estate reps for either the Clinton Foundation, the Clinton campaign, or both. This site is surmised to be a front company, registered in Panama. Feinstein has reason to deflect to the Russians--Feinstein's husband owns CBRE. "Thou dost protest too much"
Posted by: One Eyed Speaking for Boskone7919 ||
12/11/2016 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Wasn't removing the US superpower status Obama's goal for the last 8 years? One of the few he actually made progress on?
#5
ok so 2k per day for what, about 40 more days or so? djt then has 2 years, or 700+ days to ship them back. that gives him a lower daily minimum bag limit.
[Clinton News Network] Ex-CIA operative: We may need a new vote. Former CIA Operative Robert Baer says if the CIA can prove that Russia interfered with the 2016 election then the US should vote again. Robert Booker "Bob" Baer is an American author and a former CIA case officer who was primarily assigned to the Middle East. He is Time's intelligence columnist and has contributed to Vanity Fair, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. Wikipedia
[IsraelTimes] Soon to be former Senator Harry Reid ... the charismatic senator-for-life from Nevada, currently majority minority leader ... accuses agency chief James Comey of withholding information, urges Senate investigation.
Were any of this true, this would be appalling. To summarize: the CIA, which should have known and prevented it neither knew nor prevented, while the FBI knew and both said and did nothing. If electing Hillary Clinton would have given us a third term of this kind of nonsense, it is a very good thing that she threw it away.
#1
Notice how little we've heard from Islamist Brennan of late? Annuitants and freelancers such as Mr. Baer provide a convenient mouthpiece.
The Islamists (and the left), having fallen on hard times on the battlefield of ideas. They would like nothing more than a U.S. and Russian confrontation.
#2
Trump WILL be sworn in in about another month. Yrump WILL be the President of the United States. There isn't going to be another Election. The recount will turn up nothing. AND there are at least three Generals ( retired ) in Trump's Cabinet. Bolton will be the Executive Officer at the State Dept. and the Lefties are in for 8 long years of hurt.
Smell the panic? Obama won't have a L:legacy....he did everything by "executive Order" and twenty minutes after Trump sits down in the Oval Office he can write an executive order canceling al Obama NEVER got approved by Congress....PLUS he has his Cabinet appt. to carry on the fight for the next 8 years. And it WILL be a long 8 years for the piggies to squeal.
A LOT of anger to be worked off. And the good news is we WON and payback is due. You like PC? You like Liberals? You like having their you can keep your doctor and your Medical plan? You LIKE being lid to?
You like a failed economy and seeing Obama BOW and apologize and the DEBT? WORK. And remember the Left did this to you. Used you, lied to you , shoved you around.
#3
If the CIA can prove - in a court of law, to criminal justice standards, that this was done and they have names, dates, witnesses and confessions, then bring it to the SCOTUS and let them decide.
If not, then shaddup.
I knew by lunch on November 9th that the whining and b!tching from the Democrats would be at Biblical levels this year, but as far as I'm concerned this isn't sour grapes any more - this is a intentional, concerted effort at sedition now (I respectfully suggest to my Democratic friends that they take a good hard look at 18 USC Chapter 115) and consider that they are playing a very dangerous game as if they were toddlers on a playground.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/11/2016 8:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Because "Make America Great Again" is something the Kremlin can really get behind.
#5
I've stated it before: The CIA needs to be broken up and recreated with an eye on preventing the flaws currently there that have produced multiple failures in the past 25 years.
#6
I've stated it before: The CIA needs to be broken up and recreated with an eye on preventing the flaws currently there that have produced multiple failures in the past 25 years.
Posted by OldSpook
'Break up' the shadow gov't puppet masters? Best of luck with that.
#7
I have a buddy who served as an intelligence officer at Forward Operating Base 1 (FOB 1) at Phu Bai, RVN. He was in charge of pre and post deployment briefings of teams being inserted into hostile areas.
During the prep and isolation phases, the local Agency nug got into a habit of injecting additional and quite lengthy collection taskings to the inserted teams.
Finally my buddy, a no-time-in-grade Captain pulled the guy aside and said (paraphrasing) "hey Vern, we've got a primary mission here. Your stuff is add-on's. If you want to know more, you've got an M-16, get off your arse, ruck-up and tag along." The additional OGA taskings began to drop off.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[PJ] It appears that the intelligence community and counter-intelligence community are at odds over discerning motives for the Russians hacking of DNC emails and other efforts at hacking the election.
[Wash Times] As recently as Nov. 17, James Clapper, the nation’s top intelligence officer, told Congress his agencies "don’t have good insight" into a direct link between Wikileaks and the emails supposedly hacked by a Russian operation from Democrats and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
[Iran Press TV] 
[The Hill] Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Saturday he has concerns about the possibility of Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson being nominated for secretary of State, given his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
[WAPO who else?] THE WEEK started with a hopeful sign for those concerned about climate change: Former vice president Al Gore met with Donald Trump for about 90 minutes on Monday, leading some to believe that the president-elect might be ready to accept facts and evidence. By the end of the week, however, Mr. Trump had selected Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.
He's not one of them either. 
Plotting yet another bad leave. 
[Clinton News Network] Ex-CIA operative: We may need a new vote. Former CIA Operative Robert Baer says if the CIA can prove that Russia interfered with the 2016 election then the US should vote again.
Harry Reid
