Tag Archives: Russian hackers

national news

Ex-CIA boss quits Trump team … mysteriously

It must be the latent spook tendency that resides inside James Woolsey’s gut that prevents him from speaking in more declarative language as to why he’s just done something.

The former CIA director — until just yesterday — served as a senior adviser to Donald J. Trump’s presidential team. Now he’s out. Effective immediately.

You know, of course, about the swirling maelstrom concerning Trump’s dismissal of CIA analysis of Russian hackers and all that stuff, yes?

Woolsey’s spokesman said this about his sudden departure: “Effective immediately, Ambassador Woolsey is no longer a Senior Adviser to President-elect Trump or the transition, He wishes the President-elect and his Administration great success in their time in office.”

Politico reports this: “‘My background in defense and national security and intelligence I think is probably not relevant to more decisions that need to be made in the next couple of weeks,’ Woolsey said. ‘The world starts over again when the candidate now or president-elect becomes president [and] is sworn in on January 20.’

“He added: ‘I don’t want people to get the impression that I’m claiming to be something I’m not. That’s all.'”

Huh? Someone needs to translate that for me.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/james-woolsey-trump-transition-split-233257

No one has asked me my opinion, but I’ll give it anyway.

I believe Woolsey is angry at Trump’s dismissal of the CIA’s expertise on intelligence-gathering. He quit because he no longer could advise a president-elect who is so dismissive of the pros who swear an oath to protect the United States of America.

There. That’s my thought.

International news

‘No. 1 geopolitical threat’ cheers Trump victory

Let’s see how this has gone.

Four years ago, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said Russia had emerged as the nation’s “No. 1 geopolitical threat.” Liberals scoffed at Mitt; I was one of them. What do you mean, Gov. Romney? Those Russians don’t pose any serious threat to the world’s most exceptional nation.

Then in 2016, Russians are now known to be cheering the election of the latest GOP nominee, Donald J. Trump.

CIA intercepts have captured information revealing that our former top geopolitical foe was acting mighty happy at the prospect of Trump would become president of the United States.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-intercepts-capture-senior-russian-officials-celebrating-trump-win/ar-BBxWUUL?li=BBnb7Kz

Senior Russian officials were simply thrilled that Americans had elected someone friendly to their world view.

What gives here? Are they are our friends or foes?

Oh, wait! The president-elect has dismissed allegations that the Russians hacked our election system; Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (pictured) has “no doubt” the Russians did as they have accused of doing. Trump has nominated ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state; Tillerson has a close personal and professional relationship with Russian President (and former KGB boss) Vladimir Putin, who once awarded Tillerson the Medal of Friendship.

This is just me, but I wouldn’t trust this so-called “friend” as far as I can throw him.

military news, national news, political news

Trump is about to get an earful from U.S. spooks

My fondest wish at this very moment is to be a fly on the wall at the Trump Tower office where the president-elect of the United States is going to hear from the intelligence he has disparaged about what they know about Russian efforts to hack into our electoral process.

Donald Trump is playing host Friday to the director of national intelligence, the Defense Intelligence Agency director, the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency. They’re going to tell them what they know about Russian efforts to influence the presidential election we just endured.

Will the president-elect disparage these intelligence professionals to their faces? Will he tell them they don’t know what they’re talking about? Will he stand by the assertions of the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, who’s been hiding in a foreign embassy to avoid prosecution on criminal charges?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/six-big-take-aways-from-the-extraordinary-congressional-hearing-on-russian-hacking/ar-BBxWytL?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

DNI Jim Clapper said there’s a line between honest skepticism and “disparagement.” Indeed, Trump has disparaged the intelligence community’s ability to do its job, which is to provide national security information that presidents need to protect Americans from foreign adversaries.

Clapper was one of the intelligence honchos who spoke today to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee about the Russian hacking story. It was an amazing hearing. It produced pointed questions about the doubts that Trump has cast on the intelligence community. It also produced amazing answers from the intelligence pros about whether they would believe Julian Assange’s assertions dismissing Russian involvement in these hacking efforts.

The hearing today was a preliminary event, a setup for the main event set for Friday at Trump Tower.

I need serious help as I seek to turn into that fly on the wall. Oh, to listen to what the spooks tell Trump the evidence they have about Russian hackers.

International news

Trump offers us another lie

Call me skeptical, but I think Donald J. Trump is lying to us once again.

The president-elect says he knows things that others don’t know about the Russian hacking story. He knows more than the CIA intelligence experts; more than the National Security Agency analysts; more than the Defense Intelligence Agency spooks.

He said he’ll tell us “Tuesday or Wednesday” about what he knows.

Gosh, I sort of think the president-elect is lying to us … yet again.

He doesn’t know “more” than the CIA or the other intelligence officials. Suppose, though, that he has the information that no one else on Earth knows. Why is he waiting until tomorrow or the day after to tell us?

I won’t call Trump a “liar.” I am saying, though, that I believe he is prevaricating in the extreme on this matter.

Either he has information that he’s gathered from the intelligence sources that he has disparaged, or he has obtained it through unofficial channels and he might have information that cannot be proven or disproven.

The president-elect needs to stop playing mind games with the public on this matter. He is playing a ridiculous and dangerous game of chicken with the intelligence professionals he will need as he prepares to protect the nation from its enemies abroad.

What’s more, the president-elect is playing the media and the public as suckers by tempting Americans with what I believe will be a non-story when he reveals this supposedly exclusive information that “no one knows.”

International news, national news

CIA gets ‘blame’ for Russian hackers?

Here comes the counterattack from the right wing.

U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa — a fire-breathing conservative — says he believes the CIA and the National Security Agency “leaked” the info about Russians hacking into the U.S. electoral process.

Income White House press secretary Sean Spicer says there is no evidence linking Russians spooks to allegations that they meddled in our 2016 election. “There is zero evidence that they actually influenced the election,” Spicer told the Fox News Channel.

Really? Well, I don’t want to believe such a thing could happen, I am waiting to learn more about what’s been determined so far to draw my own conclusion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/312394-king-suggests-cia-and-nsa-leaked-information-on-russian-election

OK, then. I have a suggestion.

Why doesn’t the CIA provide some of the evidence it says it has that leads the U.S. spy agency to conclude the Russians did do what’s been alleged.

Should the CIA spill all the beans? Should it reveal every secret it has gathered? No. But surely there must be an avenue for the CIA to disclose to Americans interested in determining what effect — if any — this activity might have had on the outcome of the election.

As it stands now we are left to listen to empty platitudes from allies of the president-elect, who continues to dismiss — if not denigrate — the ability of the CIA and other intelligence professionals to assess national security threats.

And this brings to mind a final thought: How does a politician like Donald J. Trump get away with denigrate our intelligence gatherers while seeming to support an international adversary, such as Russia?

Imagine what those on the right would say if, oh, Barack Obama would do such a thing.

International news, national news

Come clean with hacking info, Mr. President-elect

Oh, that Donald J. Trump.

He just cannot keep his trap shut. He now says he has information about the infamous election hacking that “others don’t know.”

I cannot stop thinking about the president-elect’s assertion a number of years ago that he had information about President Barack Obama’s place of birth that others didn’t know.

The birther in chief led the rumor monger parade in asserting that Barack Obama’s presidency was illegitimate. He said he had dispatched teams of spooks to Hawaii to learn the “truth” about the president’s place of birth; it wasn’t in Hawaii, the then-reality TV celebrity said.

It turned out that Trump had nothing. Zero. He was full of bull corn.

Now he has information about whether Russians hacked into our election system? That he knows things others don’t know? That our professional spies and intelligence officials don’t have the goods on the Russians?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-he-has-hacking-information-others-%e2%80%98don%e2%80%99t-know%e2%80%99/ar-BBxLW3t?li=BBnb7Kz

Trump keeps expressing skepticism about the CIA analysis, citing bogus intelligence reports about weapons of mass destruction prior to the start of the Iraq War in 2003. Hmm. Has anyone suggested to Trump that the WMD “analysis” might have been forwarded by the neocons who comprised President Bush’s inner circle of advisers, that it didn’t come necessarily from the CIA or the Defense Intelligence Agency?

Stop teasing us, Mr. President-elect, with nutty notions that you’re smarter than the intelligence officers who are charged with keeping us safe from our adversaries.

International news, national news, political news

Trump sides with the bad guy?

How is this supposed to go?

President Barack Obama retaliated against Russian over reports that Russian spooks hacked into the U.S. electoral system.

He kicked out about 30 Russian intelligence operatives and set in motion some economic sanctions to punish the Russians.

What is Donald J. Trump’s response as he prepares to become the next president of the United States? He lavishes praise on Russian strongman Vladimir Putin for his decision to withhold any reaction to the president’s punishment.

Trump called Putin a “smart” man.

No expression of support for our own president’s decision to punish the Russians for something a number of key intelligence agencies have concluded: that their hackers sought to meddle in the U.S. presidential election.

Where in the world are the new president’s loyalties?

Hmmmm?

 

International news

U.S. hits back at Russia; hands off decision, Mr. President-elect

President Barack Obama has done what he promised to do: strike back at Russia over reports that the Russians hacked into our nation’s presidential election system.

Obama kicked out dozens of Russian intelligence operatives. The official reason for their expulsion was because of harassment of U.S. officials in Russia.

Yeah, sure it is.

The individuals expelled are believed to have been involved in cyberactivity relating to the election.

Obama also leveled economic sanctions against two Russian intelligence organizations.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/obama-strikes-back-at-russia-for-election-hacking/ar-BBxHoZz?li=BBnbcA1

What effect will this have? How does it prevent future hacking? How much will it deter other nations from trying what U.S. officials believe the Russians did — whatever it was?

I’m not qualified to answer any of that.

However, I will insist — as will others — that the new president keep his hands off the sanctions that the current president has instituted against Russia.

Donald J. Trump, to his discredit, has dismissed the intelligence analysts’ professional opinion that the Russians meddled in the U.S. election process. To whatever extent the interference determined the election outcome remains to be discovered.

Given Trump’s cavalier dismissal of the CIA and other intelligence organizations’ conclusions about Russian involvement, my strongest hope is that he follows through with what his immediate predecessor has done.

Failure to do so could send a disturbing message about the where new president’s loyalties might lie.

International news, national news, political news

This inquiring mind wants to know: What did Russians do?

I don’t doubt that Russian geeks hacked into our nation’s computer grid somehow and did something to influence the U.S. presidential election.

Unlike the president-elect, I am inclined to believe the analyses put forth by some of the best intelligence minds on the planet.

What I remain unclear about, though, is the nature of what the geeks did. What did they do — and I need a precise, detailed  explanation — to possibly tilt the election in Donald J. Trump’s favor.

* Did they put out fake messages that threatened voters in heavily Democratic precincts, decreasing voter turnout?

* Or, did they somehow make ballots cast for Hillary Clinton be logged as votes for Trump?

* Did the Russians float fake news stories about Hillary, telling voters that she is the child of Satan and that a vote for her would be a vote to send the nation straight on the express track to hell?

President Obama vows retaliation against the Russians. It could come as early as Thursday, according to some actual news reports.

But this inquiring mind — the one in my noggin — is anxious to the max to know what precisely the Russians might have done to influence our vote. Was it decisive?

Did we actually elect the wrong person as our next president?

Oh … wait!

national news, political news

Yes, Trump’s presidency will be legit, unless …

I want to get something off my chest about Donald J. Trump’s pending presidency.

He will be the duly elected, legitimate president of the United States of America. The popular vote totals don’t matter. It won’t matter one damn bit to me — really and truly — that he got 46.1 percent of the vote compared to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s  total of 48 percent.

He will be as legit as Bill Clinton’s presidency was in 1992, when he won with 43 percent of the popular vote in that three-way race against George H.W. Bush and H. Ross Perot. His presidency will be as legit as Richard Nixon’s was in 1968, when he won also with 43 percent in another three-way contest with Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace.

I get that many on the left will say otherwise, just as many on the right tried to dismiss President Clinton’s 1992 victory as a fluke, given the presence of Perot on the ballot. It wasn’t. Nor was Trump’s victory.

The popular vote is not the issue that threatens Trump’s presidential legitimacy. It’s the other stuff involving the Russian hackers and whether they actually had a tangible impact on the election result.

Congress needs to get to the root of what happened there. The CIA needs to reveal — to the extent that it can without compromising its own intelligence-gathering capability — what it knows about Russian involvement.

I hope for the sake of the country that we learn the Russians did not actually affect the outcome. I have a serious fear, though, that we might learn something sinister.

But let’s steer away from this vote-total argument.

Trump won where it counted, in accordance with how the U.S. Constitution sets forth the election of presidents.