US Intel Vets Demand Obama Show Proof of Russian Hacking or Admit It Doesn’t Exist

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

She whose name should never be mentioned lied her butt off and we got to watch the congressional dog and pony show when all the while the NSA could have produced every single email.

The problem being that NSA obtained the emails without a warrant, making it unconstitutional to use them in a DOJ or Congressional investigation.

originally posted by: sad_eyed_lady
US Intel Vets Demand Obama Show Proof of Russian Hacking or Admit It Doesn’t Exist

A group of intelligence, military, and diplomatic veterans known as Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, or VIPS, have signed a letter calling on President Barack Obama to release evidence regarding alleged Russian interference in the election. Otherwise, the letter asserts, the outgoing president must admit proof is lacking.

For any who continues to buy into the Russia Hacking report the IC and Obama put forth I submit this as expert testimony that there is no evidence.
I hope most on this website have figured this out already, this is for those who haven't.

The Letter

Publications of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity - Wikipedia

Michael W. Robbins opined in the magazine Mother Jones: The group, "Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity," has produced some of the most credible, and critical, analyses of the Bush Administration's handling of intelligence data in the run-up to the March, 2003 invasion of Iraq

I'd like to see the proof as well - but since the DNC also claims they were hacked by the Russians, they need to turn over the servers they claimed were hacked for investigation....yet they haven't turned them over...little group who cried wolf or real deal? Show us.

he has 1 day left then trump can show proof. Really bizarre, its as if obama knows trump will never see it?

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

No evidence has been given and we are supposed to be fat, dumb and happy with that.

Did I say that? No - I’m pretty sure I didn’t. What I did say is that you don’t know what’s going on any more than I do - and neither do your experts

See - this right here is why your entire argument doesn’t work. You want so badly for there to be evidence that there was no Russian influence - that you manufacture your own. You want to believe what you want to believe - no different from anyone else

I was hoping for an actual discussion :-)

The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating – saying things like “our best guess” or “our opinion” or “our estimate” etc. – shows that the emails alleged to have been “hacked” cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA’s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.

The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider – as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.

Emphasis mine - and how do they figure? They are supposing. They're asking for information to be disclosed - and they're only guessing at what it is. If they had proof of who has what - they wouldn't be writing letters to Obama

Speaking as an analyst, Binney raised the possibility that the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s server was done not by Russia but by a disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker concerned about Clinton’s compromise of national security secrets via her personal email use.

This is from your Breitbart link. Binney raised the possibility...so, is that evidence - or speculation?

Binney surmised that the hack of the DNC could have been coordinated by someone inside the U.S. intelligence community angry over Clinton’s compromise of national security data with her email use.

Your new expert just called it a hack. He also surmised (!) that it could have been someone who was pissed at Clinton. How does his surmising differ from the surmising of anyone else?

:-)

Interesting times...and nobody knows what's what

Will our new king get to the bottom of all this? I surmise that he will - in his own sweet way

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

BBC documentary says it has proof of hacking ?

Panorama the Kremlin candidate

I found it on youtube. I stopped watching it when they alleged that while in Russia Trump met Felix Slater who was a member of the Russian mafia that became his business associate.

His wikipedia en.wikipedia.org...
does not have any mention of this other than he was born in Russia:

Felix Sater was born in Moscow, Soviet Union on March 2, 1966 to parents Mikhail and Rachel Sater. A Jewish family, the Saters emigrated to Israel when Sater was eight years old to avoid religious persecution in the Soviet Union, and eventually came to the United States, living in Baltimore, Maryland before settling in Brighton Beach, New York in 1974

This documentary is a hit piece IMO. Likely backed by the UK govt.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

If you're going to slam someone for speculating, why not slam the MSM for taking it a step further from speculation, and actually using propaganda as confirmation of who did it?

“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public. That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours. But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab.

www.pbs.org...

It doesn't matter who did it at this point, what matter is that people believe the Russians did it. Does it matter that the Russians did the hacking at this point? No, the damage is already done. No amount of discussion will change that fact. Half the country already has their mind made up, the party of 'rationality and science' has made their decisions based on no evidence. That's called faith, fanaticism, zealotry, idiocy, ignorance, instability, regression.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Sorry this dog won't hunt. Facts are more important to me than opinions because facts are truth.

Correction this quote was from the Breibart story

Binney surmised that the hack of the DNC could have been coordinated by someone inside the U.S. intelligence community angry over Clinton’s compromise of national security data with her email use.

So he (or the reporter) messed up and said hack instead of leak. The guy was Technical Leader for intelligence for the NSA. I guess he's entitled to a brain fart.

Did the Russians hack the dnc?, maybe but that didn`t have any significant impact on the election.

did the Russians give the hacked E-Mails to WikiLeaks? probably not, but leaked E-mails had no significant influence on the election.

Did the contents of the leaked E-Mails have a significant influence on the election, Absolutely.

it wasn`t the hacking or the leaking of the E-mails that influenced the election,it was the contents of the E-mails and the people who wrote the E-mails are solely responsible for there contents and for the influence the E-mails had on the election.

if the Russians had hacked the DNC but no e-mails were leaked, would that have had an influence on the election, no.
if the contents of the E-mails that were leaked contained grandma`s secret apple pie recipe would that have had an influence on the election, no.

When you talk about the election being influenced the only common denominator is the contents of the E-mails,without the contents of the E-mails none of that other stuff, hacking and leaking, would have influenced the election in any way.

The people who wrote those E-mails have nobody to blame for the election being influenced except themselves.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

She whose name should never be mentioned lied her butt off and we got to watch the congressional dog and pony show when all the while the NSA could have produced every single email.

The problem being that NSA obtained the emails without a warrant, making it unconstitutional to use them in a DOJ or Congressional investigation.

The FBI never attempted to get the emails from the NSA.

“Never — I repeat, never — in my career have I or any FBI agent known to me investigated a criminal case without the use of a federal grand jury, grand jury subpoenas or search warrants,” he said. “It’s disgraceful they weren’t used in this case.”

nypost.com...

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

Obama has no Proof of a Proposed Fiction , he has been doing this for the Last Freakin' 8 Years . Has the Man EVER Told a TRUTH during that Time ? . Ah , Hell NO !

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

The FBI never attempted to get the emails from the NSA.

Exactly. That would be unconstitutional.

OBama doesn't have any proof because there is none, the only thing he's going on is the fact that he and Putin are at odds over Syria and Crimea, that's it. He wouldn't play ball and he doesn't like Obama or Hillary (democrats) hence he must be hacking the election because he favors trump. It's that simple, and Obama is that pathetic. He also greenlit one last bombing run on nothing just to add it to the record books that he did "something" in the war on terrorism... lol.

Reply to DJW001

This is why HRC congressional email investigation was not turned over to a grand jury IMO:

“As a constitutional matter, the Supreme Court has long held that, where an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, search and seizure may occur only once the government has obtained a warrant, supported by probable cause and issued by a judge. The warrant must specify the places to be searched and items to be seized.

When Trump betrays his sponsors, as his track record suggests he will, it will be interesting to see what happens.

originally posted by: Greggers
Even Trump acknowledges the Russians were involved in the Hack.

Seriously, you people need to grow up.

YOU need to grow up and understand how this game is played.

Trump is only agreeing with the garbage that is being put in front of him by Obama's intel morons. You know, the ones who have been FAILING us repeatedly for years now? Why? Because it WOULD look stupid to disagree with them publicly and I'm glad he caught that.


However, things are about to change. Trump will appoint people to weed out the political appointees and I suspect, one day, expose this lie for what it was.

a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

Sorry this dog won't hunt. Facts are more important to me than opinions because facts are truth.

Nice you got a chance to say that :-)

But - you don't have any facts. Do you? Only speculation, questions and a little begging

Correction this quote was from the Breibart story

I said in my post that it was from Breitbart:

This is from your Breitbart link. Binney raised the possibility...so, is that evidence - or speculation?

In was nestled between two bits from the same piece - so maybe you were confused? :-)

So he (or the reporter) messed up and said hack instead of leak. The guy was Technical Leader for intelligence for the NSA. I guess he's entitled to a brain fart.

So lame. He called it a hack - and he's your new favorite source. We're all allowed a few brain farts - sure. Just saying - your first source worked very hard to establish that it was most definitely, absolutely a leak

Meanwhile - this is an ongoing investigation. Everyone is on edge and there's a lot at stake. One thing's for sure - no matter what the evidence - half of us are never ever going to believe it

a reply to: GodEmperor

If you're going to slam someone for speculating...

I didn't slam anyone. Just pointing out that it is all speculation. People are too angry to have a civil discussion is all

IDoes it matter that the Russians did the hacking at this point?

Does it matter? Of course it matters. Some of us still require proof. Like me for instance - I want to hear them make their case

When you say it doesn't matter anymore , what you're really saying is that no matter what the evidence, someone will be able to claim that it's all rigged

Half the country already has their mind made up, the party of 'rationality and science' has made their decisions based on no evidence. That's called faith, fanaticism, zealotry, idiocy, ignorance, instability, regression.

Just because you say that one party has made up their minds on faith doesn't make it so. That's a kind of magical thinking on your part - or no thinking

Many people are suspicious and waiting to see what happens next. A lot of people do assume that's what happened - same as you and many in your camp assume it hasn't

Let's just wait and see how this goes

How you feeling about Western Civilization these days? Rule of law OK with you - or not so much :-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

You sure do make a lot of assumptions.

I can agree with that.

What is there to discuss, if you are just waiting to see?

The evidence points to non-state actors who used cyrilic(sp?) keyboards during Russian working hours, with indicators that can be easily manipulated as to obfuscate the true party. The fact is, that it will never be proven who did it, unless the guilty party comes out in admission of the act.

You will be waiting a very long time. Most people have already accepted the truth as given by the media, whichever flavor of choice.

How do you feel about Western Civilization? Palm trees or pavement, it's always been the rule of the jungle - or not so much.

a reply to: GodEmperor

Rule of the jungle? What are you whining about then - you shouldn't mind the outcome no matter what it is

:-)

I feel a little sad for you now - it almost sounds like you've admitted defeat

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

You caught something I missed.
You are entitled to have a laugh.