NBC sources - Putin personally involved in hacking

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You have no evidence? neither do I and neither do the Media.

I can copy and paste my post from the prior page but since you refuse to read it there you'd probably refuse to read it here.

Suffice to say there is certainly "evidence".

Originally posted by no1marauder
I can copy and paste my post from the prior page but since you refuse to read it there you'd probably refuse to read it here.

Suffice to say there is certainly "evidence".

I am sorry I did not see it at first. I read it, it contained NO compelling evidence. It did contain accusations and conjecture by the bucket load though. But at least its a step up from 'according to an NBC report.'

I am not saying that the Russkies did not do it, I just don't find the 'evidence', that you have provided very compelling and even if the Russkies did do it, so what? Mrs Clinton was warned by her own people that her network was insecure and she in her arrogance chose to ignore it. She employed a noob to set up an unauthorised and possibly illegal sever to hold classified information and she got hacked. I have something like, 'we told you so', ringing in my ears.

Fancy bear publish their findings, you can visit them here, https://fancybear.net and read all the dumped Olympic medical records of all the USA and Canadian sports persons and what drugs they were allowed to take. Retribution for sanctions against Russian athletes.

Those familiar with the classified evidence say there is even more convincing information that has not been released.

a rather typical piece of propaganda of more uncorroborated 'evidence', from clandestine and mysterious sources that are not named nor can be challenged. Ouch!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am sorry I did not see it at first. I read it, it contained NO compelling evidence. It did contain accusations and conjecture by the bucket load though. But at least its a step up from 'according to an NBC report.'

I am not saying that the Russkies did not do it, I just don't find the 'evidence', that you have provided very compelling and eve ...[text shortened]... idence', from clandestine and mysterious sources that are not named nor can be challenged. Ouch!

Umm, Hillary Clinton's server wasn't hacked; the wikileaks stuff came from the DNC and other people. Try to pay attention.

Perhaps you think it isn't a big deal IF a foreign nation's intelligence services hacked into a US political party's e-mails and then released such information in order to favor a particular candidate in a Presidential election. But it sounds kinda serious to me and most US Senators if not our dimwitted almost President-elect.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Umm, Hillary Clinton's server wasn't hacked; the wikileaks stuff came from the DNC and other people. Try to pay attention.

Perhaps you think it isn't a big deal IF a foreign nation's intelligence services hacked into a US political party's e-mails and then released such information in order to favor a particular candidate in a Presidential election. B ...[text shortened]... it sounds kinda serious to me and most US Senators if not our dimwitted almost President-elect.

ummm I think you might find views on whether it was hacked conflicting.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-17/hillarys-server-hacked-fbi-docs-reveal-confidential-file-was-found-romanian-server

You can read the heavily redacted FBI files here for yourself.

https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-04-of-04/view

Podesta was hacked, whether it was the Russkies I cannot say, whether it influenced the election to such an extent that it turned the tables, I also cannot say, it was dirty for dirty. Even if we do allow that it had decisive sway its not like the US itself has not attempted to intervene in other countries democratic elections, is it.

Originally posted by Kunsoo
The report is pretty cryptic, but they wouldn't run with this story absent solid sourcing. Doesn't mean the CIA conclusions are correct, and really we'll only be able to judge publicly if information is declassified. But this is hot off the press and if true it's huge.

http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/NBC-Putin-involved-in-election-hacking-10796939.php#photo-12035939

If you are going to lie, make it a big lie. If it is a big lie people will believe it because it must be true. No one would tell such a big lie if it were not true.

The election didn’t work out for Hillary Clinton, nor did a campaign for recounts, with some results showed Donald Trump gaining votes. Now, claims that the Kremlin hacked the U.S. election to hand the Oval Office to Trump are falling apart, too.

As one commenter to WND said, “What is next … blame Bigfoot, blame aliens, divine intervention, George Bush, global warming?”

“The bottom line is: Trump won!! Get over it!!”

Writer Matthew Vadum at Canada Free Press speculated, after the CIA declined to provide evidence of a Russian hack to Congress: “Could it be the CIA – which employs more than a few Trump haters – doesn’t actually have any evidence? If they have proof they should cough it up. But they refuse.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/12/cracks-appear-in-cia-russian-hack-scenario/

Originally posted by Kunsoo
No, but I think it's a setup. Notice that Trump has gone uncharacteristically silent. I think Obama's people are trying to bait him into vehement denials. And then they will declassify what generated the assumptions. Probably in January.

Ridiculous!

They will not declassify it because they will say they cannot reveal the spy (who does not exist) and where he heard it because that would endanger the spy's cover and safety, not that he ever heard Putin say anything about the subject. To suggest that Putin would be careless enough to let anyone with questionable loyalty in his circle is just ridiculous. It all comes down to whether or not our congressmen believe our non-existent spies are real and they of course will believe it because they are paid to believe what they are told. Their incumbency depends on it.

BTW, what about North Korea? They were accused of hacking and retaliation was promised to them without any evidence too. Have you ever considered the possibility that our government just likes to accuse others of hacking so we can hack them without the usual scrutiny of ethical justifications?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Ridiculous!

They will not declassify it because they will say they cannot reveal the spy (who does not exist) and where he heard it because that would endanger the spy's cover and safety, not that he ever heard Putin say anything about the subject. To suggest that Putin would be careless enough to let anyone with questionable loyalty in his circle is ...[text shortened]... cuse others of hacking so we can hack them without the usual scrutiny of ethical justifications?

Actually I suspect that International espionage is an every day occurrence and agree that North Korea seems a rather convenient target.