Comey confirms, Assange did not lie. Podesta emails were not given to Wikileaks by Russians

[WVPATX]

This may explain, in part, why the Dems refused to turn over their server to the FBI for analysis. Perhaps, as Assange stated, an insider, was involved. This is not to say the Russians weren't also involved in hacking Podesta or the DNC, but the question is, who gave the emails to WikiLeaks. We do know that 3 IT guys, who were later arrested after being accused of unauthorized access to Congressional computers including Debbie Wasserman Shultz. Could they have been the source of the emails being sent to WikiLeaks? Stranger and stranger.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/04/e...it-staffers-fired-in-computer-security-probe/


BOMBSHELL=> Comey to Congress: Russians DID NOT Give Podesta’s Emails to WikiLeaks

FBI Director James Comey testified in front of Congress on Monday. While the mainstream media (MSM) focused on his statements indicating that the FBI is investigating possible Russian interference in the 2016 US election, the highlight of Comey’s testimony was ignored.

Comey mentioned that the FBI is investigating the leaks of secret information to the press and he told the House Intelligence Committee the investigation is still underway and he would be unable to discuss matters linked to the investigation.

However, the most important piece of information that Comey disclosed to Congress was that the Russians did not provide WikiLeaks HIllary’s campaign manager John Podesta’s emails.

Comey said something interesting today that nobody’s picked up on yet because they’re so distracted by this other stuff, which I can understand. He was asked specifically if WikiLeaks was furnished their information on Podesta and the phone calls by the Russians, and Comey said no.


The entire case that Democrats make that ‘Russia stole the election from Hillary’ is based on the premise that Russia supplied Podesta’s emails to WikiLeaks which then somehow led to Hillary’s defeat.

Anyone who was halfway interested in the election in the fall of 2016 knows that this is a big lie in so many ways, but specifically because the MSM totally ignored WikiLeak’s dump of Podesta emails before the election.

The MSM did not share Podesta’s emails before the election and now the head of the FBI just announced that the Russians did not give these emails to WikiLeaks.

This confirms what WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in November – that his group did not get emails related to Hillary Clinton’s campaign from a “state actor.”

The crazy conspiracy that the ‘Russians prevented Hillary Clinton from winning the 2016 election’ is coming apart at the seams. Clearly, she was just a horrible candidate.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

BOMBSHELL=> Comey to Congress: Russians DID NOT Give Podesta’s Emails to WikiLeaks

FBI Director James Comey testified in front of Congress on Monday. While the mainstream media (MSM) focused on his statements indicating that the FBI is investigating possible Russian interference in the 2016 US election, the highlight of Comey’s testimony was ignored.

Comey mentioned that the FBI is investigating the leaks of secret information to the press and he told the House Intelligence Committee the investigation is still underway and he would be unable to discuss matters linked to the investigation.

However, the most important piece of information that Comey disclosed to Congress was that the Russians did not provide WikiLeaks HIllary’s campaign manager John Podesta’s emails.

Comey said something interesting today that nobody’s picked up on yet because they’re so distracted by this other stuff, which I can understand. He was asked specifically if WikiLeaks was furnished their information on Podesta and the phone calls by the Russians, and Comey said no.


The entire case that Democrats make that ‘Russia stole the election from Hillary’ is based on the premise that Russia supplied Podesta’s emails to WikiLeaks which then somehow led to Hillary’s defeat.

Anyone who was halfway interested in the election in the fall of 2016 knows that this is a big lie in so many ways, but specifically because the MSM totally ignored WikiLeak’s dump of Podesta emails before the election.

The MSM did not share Podesta’s emails before the election and now the head of the FBI just announced that the Russians did not give these emails to WikiLeaks.

This confirms what WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in November – that his group did not get emails related to Hillary Clinton’s campaign from a “state actor.”

The crazy conspiracy that the ‘Russians prevented Hillary Clinton from winning the 2016 election’ is coming apart at the seams. Clearly, she was just a horrible candidate.

The question now becomes, did someone under the employ of Trump's campaign team do it?

 

[dave]

The question now becomes, did someone under the employ of Trump's campaign team do it?

Another question would be, why did the media keep telling us this was a given? Didn't 18 agencies agree it happened at one point?

 

[TarHeelEer]

This may explain, in part, why the Dems refused to turn over their server to the FBI for analysis. Perhaps, as Assange stated, an insider, was involved. This is not to say the Russians weren't also involved in hacking Podesta or the DNC, but the question is, who gave the emails to WikiLeaks. We do know that 3 IT guys, who were later arrested after being accused of unauthorized access to Congressional computers including Debbie Wasserman Shultz. Could they have been the source of the emails being sent to WikiLeaks? Stranger and stranger.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/04/e...it-staffers-fired-in-computer-security-probe/

BOMBSHELL=> Comey to Congress: Russians DID NOT Give Podesta’s Emails to WikiLeaks

FBI Director James Comey testified in front of Congress on Monday. While the mainstream media (MSM) focused on his statements indicating that the FBI is investigating possible Russian interference in the 2016 US election, the highlight of Comey’s testimony was ignored.

Comey mentioned that the FBI is investigating the leaks of secret information to the press and he told the House Intelligence Committee the investigation is still underway and he would be unable to discuss matters linked to the investigation.

However, the most important piece of information that Comey disclosed to Congress was that the Russians did not provide WikiLeaks HIllary’s campaign manager John Podesta’s emails.

Comey said something interesting today that nobody’s picked up on yet because they’re so distracted by this other stuff, which I can understand. He was asked specifically if WikiLeaks was furnished their information on Podesta and the phone calls by the Russians, and Comey said no.


The entire case that Democrats make that ‘Russia stole the election from Hillary’ is based on the premise that Russia supplied Podesta’s emails to WikiLeaks which then somehow led to Hillary’s defeat.

Anyone who was halfway interested in the election in the fall of 2016 knows that this is a big lie in so many ways, but specifically because the MSM totally ignored WikiLeak’s dump of Podesta emails before the election.

The MSM did not share Podesta’s emails before the election and now the head of the FBI just announced that the Russians did not give these emails to WikiLeaks.

This confirms what WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said in November – that his group did not get emails related to Hillary Clinton’s campaign from a “state actor.”

The crazy conspiracy that the ‘Russians prevented Hillary Clinton from winning the 2016 election’ is coming apart at the seams. Clearly, she was just a horrible candidate.

Podesta emails were the treasure trove, and they didn't come from the Russians. Imagine that.

I go back to Assange putting a bounty on Seth Rich's killer. Link

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Another question would be, why did the media keep telling us this was a given? Didn't 18 agencies agree it happened at one point?

The Russians were still behind the hacks. They just used a 3rd party to give the info to Wikileaks.

 

[WVPATX]

The question now becomes, did someone under the employ of Trump's campaign team do it?

I absolutely believe Trump's campaign should be looked at for this possible hacking. I also believe these brothers should be looked at. They are already in custody and it is strange beyond belief the DNC should not turn over their servers to the FBI for forensic analysis. Why?

Assange said it was an inside job. They need to look at all angles. But I will tell you the DNC leaked emails and the Podesta emails did not seem to show any issue with Hillary at all. They were embarrassing for the Dems and the media collusion, but that was about it.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Podesta emails were the treasure trove, and they didn't come from the Russians. Imagine that.

FAKE NEWS. They absolutely came from the Russians using a 3rd party. But keep sticking to the conspiracy theories. The Clintons killed Seth Rich bc he knew about the Comet pizzas!!

 

[WVPATX]

The Russians were still behind the hacks. They just used a 3rd party to give the info to Wikileaks.

Comey apparently ruled that out. He said the Russians weren't involved in leaking to WikiLeaks. You're speculating against Comey's testimony. I fully believe the Russians were fully capable and likely did hack Podesta. But that does not mean they leaked to WikiLeaks. So much we don't yet know. The investigation must continue, be thorough and without political interference. It is good that Trump stepped away from this and allowed the Senate and the House to do it duty. Otherwise, he would have been accused of a coverup.

 

[WVPATX]

FAKE NEWS. They absolutely came from the Russians using a 3rd party. But keep sticking to the conspiracy theories. The Clintons killed Seth Rich bc he knew about the Comet pizzas!!

You are making a statement with no factual basis. The Russians may have hacked Podesta, potentially likely hacked Podesta. Comey said they were not the source of the leak to WikiLeaks. At this point, I trust Comey more than your speculation.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

The Russians were still behind the hacks. They just used a 3rd party to give the info to Wikileaks.

Exactly. He even said they used a "cutout". His word. Who wrote that piece? Trumplethinskin himself? Talk about fake news.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Comey apparently ruled that out. He said the Russians weren't involved in leaking to WikiLeaks. You're speculating against Comey's testimony. I fully believe the Russians were fully capable and likely did hack Podesta. But that does not mean they leaked to WikiLeaks. So much we don't yet know. The investigation must continue, be thorough and without political interference. It is good that Trump stepped away from this and allowed the Senate and the House to do it duty. Otherwise, he would have been accused of a coverup.

COMEY: We assessed they (Russia) used some kind of cutout. They didn't deal directly with WikiLeaks. In contrast to D.C. Leaks and Guccifer 2.0.

It's right there. Russia hacked him and the DNC and went through a 3rd party to get the stolen info to Wikileaks.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

You are making a statement with no factual basis. The Russians may have hacked Podesta, potentially likely hacked Podesta. Comey said they were not the source of the leak to WikiLeaks. At this point, I trust Comey more than your speculation.

No, you trust some like minded spin doctor over what Comey said.

 

[WVPATX]

COMEY: We assessed they (Russia) used some kind of cutout. They didn't deal directly with WikiLeaks. In contrast to D.C. Leaks and Guccifer 2.0.

It's right there. Russia hacked him and the DNC and went through a 3rd party to get the stolen info to Wikileaks.

We "assessed." That is far different than the definitive statement that the Russians gave the material to a cut out. He admitted the Russians did not give the emails to WikiLeaks. Assange stated the Russians did not, he said it was an inside job. 3 IT people were fired for accessing information on computers including the Intelligence Committees and Wasserman Schultz.

Again, I am not disputing the claim the Russians hacked Podesta, I am saying we have no proof, at least Comey provided no proof, that the Russians gave it to WikiLeaks. We have no proof that any Trump official was involved. Lots of angles to follow. The only proof of illegal activity we have is the leak of Flynn's name and transcript.

 

[countryroads89]

FAKE NEWS. They absolutely came from the Russians using a 3rd party.

And it's quite possible that Roger Stone is your 3rd party.

"In August, Stone tweeted, "Trust me, it will soon be Podesta's time in the barrel. #Crooked Hillary."

In October, Wikileaks began releasing Podesta's emails, which proved damaging to the Clinton campaign."

 

[WVUCOOPER]

We "assessed." That is far different than the definitive statement that the Russians gave the material to a cut out. He admitted the Russians did not give the emails to WikiLeaks. Assange stated the Russians did not, he said it was an inside job. 3 IT people were fired for accessing information on computers including the Intelligence Committees and Wasserman Schultz.

Again, I am not disputing the claim the Russians hacked Podesta, I am saying we have no proof, at least Comey provided no proof, that the Russians gave it to WikiLeaks. We have no proof that any Trump official was involved. Lots of angles to follow. The only proof of illegal activity we have is the leak of Flynn's name and transcript.

How about the Director of the NSA? Would that be enough?

Admiral Rogers, thanks for confirming that, but am I correct, that the -- when we say Russian hacking what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the Russians penetrated the networks of the DNC, of John Podesta, and other individuals, stole information and then disseminated that information. Is that a fair characterization of the -- of the conclusions of the intelligence community?

ROGERS: Yes sir.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

How about the Director of the NSA? Would that be enough?

Admiral Rogers, thanks for confirming that, but am I correct, that the -- when we say Russian hacking what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the Russians penetrated the networks of the DNC, of John Podesta, and other individuals, stole information and then disseminated that information. Is that a fair characterization of the -- of the conclusions of the intelligence community?

ROGERS: Yes sir.

He's obviously a fake NSA so anything he says is false. You should only believe what Trumplethinskin tweets. His sources are credible.

 

[WVPATX]

How about the Director of the NSA? Would that be enough?

Admiral Rogers, thanks for confirming that, but am I correct, that the -- when we say Russian hacking what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the Russians penetrated the networks of the DNC, of John Podesta, and other individuals, stole information and then disseminated that information. Is that a fair characterization of the -- of the conclusions of the intelligence community?

ROGERS: Yes sir.

I admitted the Russians likely hacked Podesta. As Comey said, the FBI "assessed" they gave the emails to Wikileaks. Assessed is not the same as stating the FBI has direct proof. Assange said it was an inside job. 3 IT guys with potential access to this information were very recently fired. The DNC would not permit the FBI to forensically examine the servers.

What we do know, without any speculation, is that laws were broken in releasing General Flynn's name to the media.

It may well turn out the Russians gave the Pedestal emails to Wikileaks. But as of now, the proof of such has not been make known to us.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

I admitted the Russians likely hacked Podesta. As Comey said, the FBI "assessed" they gave the emails to Wikileaks. Assessed is not the same as stating the FBI has direct proof. Assange said it was an inside job. 3 IT guys with potential access to this information were very recently fired. The DNC would not permit the FBI to forensically examine the servers.

What we do know, without any speculation, is that laws were broken in releasing General Flynn's name to the media.

It may well turn out the Russians gave the Pedestal emails to Wikileaks. But as of now, the proof of such has not been make known to us.

Are you really that dense?

 

[countryroads89]

Are you really that dense?

It's amazing.

 

[WVPATX]

Are you really that dense?

Much, much smarter than you. I have many more skills than just fitting eye glasses, lol.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

I admitted the Russians likely hacked Podesta. As Comey said, the FBI "assessed" they gave the emails to Wikileaks. Assessed is not the same as stating the FBI has direct proof. Assange said it was an inside job. 3 IT guys with potential access to this information were very recently fired. The DNC would not permit the FBI to forensically examine the servers.

What we do know, without any speculation, is that laws were broken in releasing General Flynn's name to the media.

It may well turn out the Russians gave the Pedestal emails to Wikileaks. But as of now, the proof of such has not been make known to us.

I honestly can't even follow that. Are you saying the Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta, but someone on the inside the DNC ALSO hacked the DNC/Podesta and supplied Wikileaks? Therefore Russia's hack was just a coincidence?

 

[TarHeelEer]

FAKE NEWS. They absolutely came from the Russians using a 3rd party. But keep sticking to the conspiracy theories. The Clintons killed Seth Rich bc he knew about the Comet pizzas!!

Just read the transcript, I didn't hear the speech. Correct, he never said anything close to that. He didn't say much of anything, matter of fact.

 

[WVPATX]

I honestly can't even follow that. Are you saying the Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta, but someone on the inside the DNC ALSO hacked the DNC/Podesta and supplied Wikileaks? Therefore Russia's hack was just a coincidence?

Are you suggesting that is not possible? Of course two or more parties could have been involved, that is nothing new and happens all the time. We know the Russians were involved. How do you know that no one else, outside the Russians, was involved? Like the Chinese, North Koreans, mischievous hackers, the inside IT guys, etc.

I already posted the article on the firing of the 3 inside IT guys. What did they do? What information did they access? We still need to find out. And they had direct access to Wasserman Shultz's technology including passwords.

This summary is about as concise a look at this as I can find regarding collusion (no reason or need for collusion).

WHAT TO MAKE OF RUSSIA’S “UNUSUALLY LOUD” INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION
FBI director Comey didn’t say much during his testimony today. He did confirm that the FBI is investigating possible links between Russia and the Trump campaign, but this might have been the worst kept secret in Washington.

Comey did volunteer something notable when he compared Russian interference in the 2016 election to Russian interference in past elections. He described the interference last year as “unusually loud.” He added that it was as if the Russians didn’t care that we knew what they were doing.

This view is consistent with an observation I’ve made from time to time, based on what I’ve been told by people knowledgeable about intelligence: If we know that Russia was behind the hacking of various email servers, it’s because the Russians want us to know.

Comey was asked why he thinks the Russians interfered so “loudly” in last year’s election. He answered that it might be because they wanted to undermine the credibility of our democratic system and to “freak people out.”

Comey then acknowledged that the Russians will conclude that their strategy “worked.” Indeed, they will — and they should.

The desire to “freak out” America, or at least our political class, is just one of the explanations put forth at the hearing today for Russia’s interference that did not involve “collusion.” Comey and Adm. Mike Rogers both subscribed to the view that the Russians wanted Donald Trump to win because they were furious with Hillary Clinton for supposedly encouraging anti-Putin demonstrations.

They both subscribed to the view that at some point, perhaps in late summer of 2016, the Russians concluded that Clinton was almost surely going to win. At that point, they say, the Putin’s purpose in releasing damaging emails was to undermine Clinton’s standing as president, not to prevent her election.

Some Democrats argued that Russia had good reason to want Donald Trump to become president quite apart from their unhappiness with Hillary Clinton. They cited his criticism of NATO and his status as a businessman who, allegedly, thinks he can make deals with almost anyone. (They ignored countervailing considerations, such as Trump’s pledge to significantly strengthen the American military.) Comey and Rogers didn’t adopt this theory, but they seemed to consider it plausible.

In sum, there are at least four plausible reasons why Putin might have interfered in the election as he did: (1) he wanted to “freak out” Americans and cause them to lose confidence in the system, (2) he was extremely angry at Hillary Clinton, (3) he thought Clinton was going to win and wanted to weaken her presidency, and (4) he liked some of Trump’s positions.

With all of these theories to choose from, there is no need to resort to conspiracy theory by claiming collusion. Russia had plenty of reasons to act as it did without receiving any favors or promises from the Trump campaign.

If there were evidence that Russia received favors or promises, we would have to add collusion to our list of plausible reasons why Putin interfered as he did. But so far there is no such evidence and the Democrats’ attempt to present some at today’s hearing fell flat.

 

[dave]

The Russians were still behind the hacks. They just used a 3rd party to give the info to Wikileaks.

Did Comey say that? I have only seen blurbs from his hearing yesterday.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Are you suggesting that is not possible? Of course two or more parties could have been involved, that is nothing new and happens all the time. We know the Russians were involved. How do you know that no one else, outside the Russians, was involved? Like the Chinese, North Koreans, mischievous hackers, the inside IT guys, etc.

I already posted the article on the firing of the 3 inside IT guys. What did they do? What information did they access? We still need to find out. And they had direct access to Wasserman Shultz's technology including passwords.

This summary is about as concise a look at this as I can find regarding collusion (no reason or need for collusion).

WHAT TO MAKE OF RUSSIA’S “UNUSUALLY LOUD” INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION
FBI director Comey didn’t say much during his testimony today. He did confirm that the FBI is investigating possible links between Russia and the Trump campaign, but this might have been the worst kept secret in Washington.

Comey did volunteer something notable when he compared Russian interference in the 2016 election to Russian interference in past elections. He described the interference last year as “unusually loud.” He added that it was as if the Russians didn’t care that we knew what they were doing.

This view is consistent with an observation I’ve made from time to time, based on what I’ve been told by people knowledgeable about intelligence: If we know that Russia was behind the hacking of various email servers, it’s because the Russians want us to know.

Comey was asked why he thinks the Russians interfered so “loudly” in last year’s election. He answered that it might be because they wanted to undermine the credibility of our democratic system and to “freak people out.”

Comey then acknowledged that the Russians will conclude that their strategy “worked.” Indeed, they will — and they should.

The desire to “freak out” America, or at least our political class, is just one of the explanations put forth at the hearing today for Russia’s interference that did not involve “collusion.” Comey and Adm. Mike Rogers both subscribed to the view that the Russians wanted Donald Trump to win because they were furious with Hillary Clinton for supposedly encouraging anti-Putin demonstrations.

They both subscribed to the view that at some point, perhaps in late summer of 2016, the Russians concluded that Clinton was almost surely going to win. At that point, they say, the Putin’s purpose in releasing damaging emails was to undermine Clinton’s standing as president, not to prevent her election.

Some Democrats argued that Russia had good reason to want Donald Trump to become president quite apart from their unhappiness with Hillary Clinton. They cited his criticism of NATO and his status as a businessman who, allegedly, thinks he can make deals with almost anyone. (They ignored countervailing considerations, such as Trump’s pledge to significantly strengthen the American military.) Comey and Rogers didn’t adopt this theory, but they seemed to consider it plausible.

In sum, there are at least four plausible reasons why Putin might have interfered in the election as he did: (1) he wanted to “freak out” Americans and cause them to lose confidence in the system, (2) he was extremely angry at Hillary Clinton, (3) he thought Clinton was going to win and wanted to weaken her presidency, and (4) he liked some of Trump’s positions.

With all of these theories to choose from, there is no need to resort to conspiracy theory by claiming collusion. Russia had plenty of reasons to act as it did without receiving any favors or promises from the Trump campaign.

If there were evidence that Russia received favors or promises, we would have to add collusion to our list of plausible reasons why Putin interfered as he did. But so far there is no such evidence and the Democrats’ attempt to present some at today’s hearing fell flat.

That's an absolute hoot to me. So the Russians hacked the info, but someone else beat them to publishing it! That's some grade A shit these people are on.

 

[WVPATX]

Did Comey say that? I have only seen blurbs from his hearing yesterday.

According to earlier postings, Comey said the FBI "assessed" the Russians used a 3rd party to provide Wikileaks with the info. That may be true, but we have no proof or at least Comey did not provide any.

 

[WVPATX]

And your contention is that no one else could have hacked the DNC or Podesta. What about these guys? What about the Chinese? The North Koreans? We know the Russians were involved. Were they the only ones?

That's an absolute hoot to me. So the Russians hacked the info, but someone else beat them to publishing it! That's some grade A shit these people are on.

Three congressional IT employees fired for accessing members’ computer networks without permission
Sarah Lee Feb 4, 2017 5:42 pm

Imran Awan in an undated Facebook photo with former president Bill Clinton. (Image source: The Daily Caller)
218FollowSHARE

• TWEET

In an exclusive Saturday, the Daily Caller revealed that three brothers who worked as information technology professionals for some members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence were fired from their positions under suspicion they had accessed congressional computer networks without authorization.

The Daily Caller reports:

Brothers Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan were barred from computer networks at the House of Representatives Thursday, The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group has learned.

Three members of the intelligence panel and five members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs were among the dozens of members who employed the suspects on a shared basis. The two committees deal with many of the nation’s most sensitive issues, information and documents, including those related to the war on terrorism.

The brothers were suspected of multiple violations including accessing members’ computer networks without their knowledge and stealing equipment from Congress.

The men are “shared employees,” and are split between offices as need requires. Jamal worked for Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), a member of both the intelligence and foreign affairs panels and Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) who is on the Committee on Homeland Security.

Imran did work for Reps. Andre Carson (D-Ind.) and Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), both of whom serve as members of the intelligence committee, while Abid worked for then-Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), a member of House committees on oversight, armed services and Benghazi, and Rep. Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), a member of the foreign affairs committee.

There are reports that at least one of the brothers had a prior criminal record. According to the Daily Caller, Jamal is only 22 years old and was paid nearly $160,000 a year, three times the average House IT staff salary, according to InsideGov, which tracks congressional salaries. Abid was paid $161,000 and Imran $165,000.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who was the target of a well-publicized email hack as chair of the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 campaign, may have been one of the members whose network was compromised and illegally accessed by the brothers.

Capitol Police spokeswoman Eva Malecki said the investigation was ongoing. No arrests have been made.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

According to earlier postings, Comey said the FBI "assessed" the Russians used a 3rd party to provide Wikileaks with the info. That may be true, but we have no proof or at least Comey did not provide any.

Really? You think he's going to lay out his evidence in an open hearing before they've completed their investigation. And as far as your hang up on the word assessment, it means determination. Good god you're an idiot.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Did Comey say that? I have only seen blurbs from his hearing yesterday.

I mean I feel like we are heading towards a Bill Clinton special of parsing what the meaning of it is or some BS. Comey and the NSA Director said Russia hacked the DNC/Podesta. Comey said the FBI "assessed" the Russians used a cut out to get the info to Wikileaks. PATX says he thinks Russia hacked the DNC/Podesta but sat on the info and DNC insiders then hacked and supplied the info to Wikileaks. Maybe Lee Harvey Oswald is alive and behind all this?

 

[dave]

According to earlier postings, Comey said the FBI "assessed" the Russians used a 3rd party to provide Wikileaks with the info. That may be true, but we have no proof or at least Comey did not provide any.

Thanks.

 

[WVPATX]

Really? You think he's going to lay out his evidence in an open hearing before they've completed their investigation. And as far as your hang up on the word assessment, it means determination. Good god you're an idiot.

Assessment means:

as·sess·ment
əˈsesmənt/
noun

1. the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality, or ability of someone or something.
   
   Comey is very, very careful with his words. Assessment is an evolution and/or ESTIMATION. It is not definitive. If Comey had proof, he would have used a far more definitive term.

 

[dave]

Comey and the NSA Director said Russia hacked the DNC/Podesta.

Thanks. That was what I was getting at before. If 18 intel agencies said the russians were behind it I would hope to God that would still be the testimony by the FBI or the NSA now.

 

[WVPATX]

I mean I feel like we are heading towards a Bill Clinton special of parsing what the meaning of it is or some BS. Comey and the NSA Director said Russia hacked the DNC/Podesta. Comey said the FBI "assessed" the Russians used a cut out to get the info to Wikileaks. PATX says he thinks Russia hacked the DNC/Podesta but sat on the info and DNC insiders then hacked and supplied the info to Wikileaks. Maybe Lee Harvey Oswald is alive and behind all this?

No, I am saying that we as of yet, have no proof the Russians gave the emails to WikiLeaks. I am also saying that the only felony we know was committed was the leaking of Flynn's name to the media. I said the Russians may well have hacked and leaked Podesta's emails. But I also offered other possibilities and questions:

1. Why were the IT guys fired? What information did they access?
2. Why did the DNC refuse to provide the FBI with their server for forensic analysis? Can you explain this? Does it seem they did not want the FBI to know something?
3. I am also saying that other foreign agents could have hacked the DNC and Podesta.
4. Perhaps the Russians did give the emails to Wikileaks. Perhaps other actors did as well (thus Assange's claim the Russians were not the source). Perhaps the IT guys that were arrested accessed the information and sold it to WikiLeaks.

I am amazed with so many possibilities you can't see why Comey used the word "assessed." The reason, Imo, is that they think the Russians did it but have no proof.

 

[WVPATX]

Thanks. That was what I was getting at before. If 18 intel agencies said the russians were behind it I would hope to God that would still be the testimony by the FBI or the NSA now.

Read this:

Makes a powerful case, if the Russians leaked to WikiLeaks why there was no need for collusion:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...ly-loud-interference-in-the-2016-election.php

 

[Mntneer]

Another question would be, why did the media keep telling us this was a given? Didn't 18 agencies agree it happened at one point?

I'd love to know which 18 agencies.... CTU? Jack Bauer involved?

And I'm still waiting on the proof that shows Russian government involvement in the hacks. Surmising that Russians were involved is one thing. Tieing it to the Russian government is another. And from what I understand, the justification provided so far is based on the tools used.

 

[WVPATX]

I'd love to know which 18 agencies.... CTU? Jack Bauer involved?

And I'm still waiting on the proof that shows Russian government involvement in the hacks. Surmising that Russians were involved is one thing. Tieing it to the Russian government is another. And from what I understand, the justification provided so far is based on the tools used.

Here is the key point. Lets say Coop is right and that the Russians hacked and leaked the DNC and Podesta' emails to WikiLeaks. That is bad, but doesn't necessarily involved anyone in the Trump campaign which is what the Dems are praying for.

Comey said yesterday that the Russians hated Clinton. They believed she would win and wanted to discredit her presidency. They were, as Comey described", very "loud" with the hacking. In other words, they did not try to hide anything.

Therefore, they did not need to collude with anyone to hack and leak, right? Given this motivation, their own motivation, not the Trump's campaign, they did not need any prodding from anyone.

If Trump's campaign were involved because the Russians liked Trump, would they have at least tried to hide their hacking? It makes no sense.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Assessment means:

as·sess·ment
əˈsesmənt/
noun

1. the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality, or ability of someone or something.
   
   Comey is very, very careful with his words. Assessment is an evolution and/or ESTIMATION. It is not definitive. If Comey had proof, he would have used a far more definitive term.

Definition of assessment
1 : the action or an instance of making a judgment about something

 

[WVPATX]

Definition of assessment
1 : the action or an instance of making a judgment about something

Judgement is far different that PROOF. Judgment is making a decisions based on information, not the same as definitive proof. Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

I make a judgment that you are a fool. My judgment may be flawed. You may be the smartest guy in all of eyeglass fitter world in the state of Tennessee.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

I'd love to know which 18 agencies.... CTU? Jack Bauer involved?

And I'm still waiting on the proof that shows Russian government involvement in the hacks. Surmising that Russians were involved is one thing. Tieing it to the Russian government is another. And from what I understand, the justification provided so far is based on the tools used.

lmao.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Here is the key point. Lets say Coop is right and that the Russians hacked and leaked the DNC and Podesta' emails to WikiLeaks. That is bad, but doesn't necessarily involved anyone in the Trump campaign which is what the Dems are praying for.

Comey said yesterday that the Russians hated Clinton. They believed she would win and wanted to discredit her presidency. They were, as Comey described", very "loud" with the hacking. In other words, they did not try to hide anything.

Therefore, they did not need to collude with anyone to hack and leak, right? Given this motivation, their own motivation, not the Trump's campaign, they did not need any prodding from anyone.

If Trump's campaign were involved because the Russians liked Trump, would they have at least tried to hide their hacking? It makes no sense.

Overwhelmingly agree with this post. Would it surprise me if Flynn, Manafort or Stone were somehow involved...no....but I don't think the Trump or Trump campaign had anything to do with the election meddling. Which is what makes all the denials and, basically, standing up for Russia infuriates the f**k out of me. F Russia and F Putin, and then let the Democrats over play their hand.