Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: angeldoll

Why do we need a re-call? The only thing this shows is the Russians could have changed vote totals...Which were in her favor. However thankfully we have the electorial college!

Methinks you didn't read it properly. Especially the part about spearphishing.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Perfect timing for the article !!

But no proof the docs stolen are the ones given to "The Intercept".

There is a DOJ complaint here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

No proof they are the same.

In fact, if the intercept sat on it for a month,
One would wonder why?

Because possible it does not mention Trump?

It's occurring to me that almost everyone, except the Trump Administration, Reeks of Corruption and Disdain for Americans!

Contractors
Clinton
Congress (Work only 138 days a year)
Comey
Ginsburg
Rice
Lynch
Putin
U.N.
G-7
NATO
...who else.

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: angeldoll
We need a re-call election. "Attacked the voter registration process".

We NEED a re-call election asap.

Trump will win even bigger lol.

After all her rants that got published lately for sure. Trump would win by a landslide.

a reply to: RickyD

With some states bound to vote based on state popular winner and other bound to split electorate votes by county... it's possible

IF

votes were changed which there doesn't seem to be evidence of

OR

voter statuses were changed, which the article states is possible.

a reply to: burntheships

I think this whole thing was cleverly set up.

Timing is so perfect on this !!


Story breaks about a leaked document -- ties in nicely with "Russians"


In the meantime, the Justice Dept announces a major case !!


AND - it's so perfect --- "During that conversation, Winner admitted intentionally identifying and printing the classified intelligence reporting at issue despite not having a ‘need to know,' and with knowledge that the intelligence reporting was classified."


And the "name" is so ironic too !

"Reality Leigh Winner"

a reply to: 3daysgone

the information is what it is. This still doesn't prove anything about the Podesta e-mails that Wiki released, this is about election hacking.

Perhaps some brave soul will commit to 10 years on prison and release more classified docs to prove that part next week.

But treating someone who releases classified docs as a hero is a very dangerous precedent. (IMHO)

a reply to: alphabetaone

I am pretty sure I read it properly. Can you explain how it benefits Trump? I see the article say they could have accessed the voter databases and changed things up to skew vote totals but we all know Hillary got more votes. How does spearphishing allow the ruskies to hack the electorial college?

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: introvert

TLDR, I went for the bold part.

I think it's important to note that your source says the news outlet that received the info were the ones to contact the "agency" to let them know what had been released.

They worked with the agency to ensure what they did release did not harm national security, for what it's worth.

Which is why, after the agency asked it to not be published (which was refused), they then requested redactions, which the media granted before publication.

Freedom of the press, baby.

Absolutely.

But if some would have their way, the media could also be prosecuted simply for publication, or else welcome prior restraint.

We should pay no mind to the anti-constitutional naysayers.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: angeldoll
We need a re-call election. "Attacked the voter registration process".

We NEED a re-call election asap.

So that Hillary can lose again? Oh yes please.

If she does, she does. If Trump should win without all these icky shadows following him, he wins.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: angeldoll
We need a re-call election. "Attacked the voter registration process".

We NEED a re-call election asap.

But there is, as of yet, no evidence the election was actually influenced.

Even Obama said so...and HE, of all people, would have been aware of these reports at the time.

a reply to: burntheships

In fact, if the intercept sat on it for a month,
One would wonder why?

So they could confirm authenticity, contact the NSA, and verify it?

So, you know, people wouldn't immediately say "anonymous source! Fake!"?

The top-secret National Security Agency document, which was provided anonymously to The Intercept and independently authenticated

Sounds like they did their homework before publication.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: RickyD

With some states bound to vote based on state popular winner and other bound to split electorate votes by county... it's possible

IF

votes were changed which there doesn't seem to be evidence of

OR

voter statuses were changed, which the article states is possible.

If we had completely different candidates, I would be all for it....otherwise may as well leave the cesspool alone until the septic disposal unit comes to town.

WINNER will go to jail, and all this will be washed over by ongoing events. I want to find where the Liberal Main Stream Media is PAYING for leaks of private or sensitive or classified information. You just know its happening!

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: introvert

Tell ya what let's start with some of this circumstantial evidence...
Linky
In light of the emails made public doesn't it seem to you like that sort of collusion is just the type of game her and her team play? Seems to me we have a whole lot more to go on there than we ever did to investigate Trump like we are now. Yet I see the same people calling for Trump's investigation yet never a word mentioned about investing her over the same thing...Yet as we can see there is a lot more there in her and her teams case.

Do you not find it interesting that there is an investigation in to one of the aspects you mentioned, but no indication of an investigation to the other?

Circumstantial evidence....my ass.

a reply to: IAMTAT

What Obama "said" is irrelevant here.

Nice try.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: network dude

And more importantly, should this girl get a free pass for releasing classified documents? (I think she even had intent)

Exactly. This is what intent looks like.

In the case of the other girl whom we shall not name, there was no intent. Hence, no charges.

It's all coming full-circle.

I was actually being facetious because I happen to know that the law as written has no "intent" clause. It was humor.

But thanks for not mentioning that name.

You're welcome.

Sorry for missing the intended humor.

originally posted by: Kali74
If this is true... it's huge.

He was warned against drawing conclusions by his "source" but did anyway.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: RickyD

With some states bound to vote based on state popular winner and other bound to split electorate votes by county... it's possible

IF

votes were changed which there doesn't seem to be evidence of

OR

voter statuses were changed, which the article states is possible.

If we had completely different candidates, I would be all for it....otherwise may as well leave the cesspool alone until the septic disposal unit comes to town.

An entirely new election would be great... toss those two on an iceberg and let them play king of the hill.