us election 2016 Secret CIA Assessment Says Russia Was Trying To Help Trump Win White House

[vissha]

Secret CIA Assessment Says Russia Was Trying To Help Trump Win White House

 

CIA officials told senators it is now “quite clear” that electing Donald Trump was Russia’s goal. In an interview on Fox News Sunday on Dec. 11, President-elect Trump denied the CIA's assessment. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)

 

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.

 

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

 

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”

 

The Post's Ellen Nakashima goes over the events, and discusses the two hacker groups responsible. (Jhaan Elker/The Washington Post)

 

The Obama administration has been debating for months how to respond to the alleged Russian intrusions, with White House officials concerned about escalating tensions with Moscow and being accused of trying to boost Clinton’s campaign.

 

[U.S. government officially accuses Russia of hacking campaign to interfere with elections]

 

In September, during a secret briefing for congressional leaders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voiced doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to officials present.

 

The Trump transition team dismissed the findings in a short statement issued Friday evening. “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again,’ ” the statement read.

 

Trump has consistently dismissed the intelligence community’s findings about Russian hacking.

 

“I don’t believe they interfered” in the election, he told Time magazine this week. The hacking, he said, “could be Russia. And it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.”

 

The CIA shared its latest assessment with key senators in a closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill last week, in which agency officials cited a growing body of intelligence from multiple sources. Agency briefers told the senators it was now “quite clear” that electing Trump was Russia’s goal, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) says he wants to investigate whether Russia interfered with the 2016 U.S. election, amongst claims that Donald Trump's rhetoric on Russia and Vladimir Putin is too soft. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

 

The CIA presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies. A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.

 

For example, intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin “directing” the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks, a second senior U.S. official said. Those actors, according to the official, were “one step” removed from the Russian government, rather than government employees. Moscow has in the past used middlemen to participate in sensitive intelligence operations so it has plausible deniability.

 

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said in a television interview that the “Russian government is not the source.”

 

The White House and CIA officials declined to comment.

 

On Friday, the White House said President Obama had ordered a “full review” of Russian hacking during the election campaign, as pressure from Congress has grown for greater public understanding of exactly what Moscow did to influence the electoral process.

 

“We may have crossed into a new threshold, and it is incumbent upon us to take stock of that, to review, to conduct some after-action, to understand what has happened and to impart some lessons learned,” Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser, Lisa Monaco, told reporters at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

 

Obama wants the report before he leaves office Jan. 20, Monaco said. The review will be led by James Clapper, the outgoing director of national intelligence, officials said.

 

During her remarks, Monaco didn’t address the latest CIA assessment, which hasn’t been previously disclosed.

 

Seven Democratic senators last week asked Obama to declassify details about the intrusions and why officials believe that the Kremlin was behind the operation. Officials said Friday that the senators specifically were asking the White House to release portions of the CIA’s presentation.

 

This week, top Democratic lawmakers in the House also sent a letter to Obama, asking for briefings on Russian interference in the election.

 

U.S. intelligence agencies have been cautious for months in characterizing Russia’s motivations, reflecting the United States’ long-standing struggle to collect reliable intelligence on President Vladi­mir Putin and those closest to him.

 

In previous assessments, the CIA and other intelligence agencies told the White House and congressional leaders that they believed Moscow’s aim was to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system. The assessments stopped short of saying the goal was to help elect Trump.

 

On Oct. 7, the intelligence community officially accused Moscow of seeking to interfere in the election through the hacking of “political organizations.” Though the statement never specified which party, it was clear that officials were referring to cyber-intrusions into the computers of the DNC and other Democratic groups and individuals.

 

Some key Republican lawmakers have continued to question the quality of evidence supporting Russian involvement.

 

“I’ll be the first one to come out and point at Russia if there’s clear evidence, but there is no clear evidence — even now,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a member of the Trump transition team. “There’s a lot of innuendo, lots of circumstantial evidence, that’s it.”

 

[U.S. investigating potential covert Russian plan to disrupt elections]

 

Though Russia has long conducted cyberspying on U.S. agencies, companies and organizations, this presidential campaign marks the first time Moscow has attempted through cyber-means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election, the officials said.

 

The reluctance of the Obama White House to respond to the alleged Russian intrusions before Election Day upset Democrats on the Hill as well as members of the Clinton campaign.

 

Within the administration, top officials from different agencies sparred over whether and how to respond. White House officials were concerned that covert retaliatory measures might risk an escalation in which Russia, with sophisticated cyber-capabilities, might have less to lose than the United States, with its vast and vulnerable digital infrastructure.

 

The White House’s reluctance to take that risk left Washington weighing more-limited measures, including the “naming and shaming” approach of publicly blaming Moscow.

 

By mid-September, White House officials had decided it was time to take that step, but they worried that doing so unilaterally and without bipartisan congressional backing just weeks before the election would make Obama vulnerable to charges that he was using intelligence for political purposes.

 

Instead, officials devised a plan to seek bipartisan support from top lawmakers and set up a secret meeting with the Gang of 12 — a group that includes House and Senate leaders, as well as the chairmen and ranking members of both chambers’ committees on intelligence and homeland security.

 

Obama dispatched Monaco, FBI Director James B. Comey and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson to make the pitch for a “show of solidarity and bipartisan unity” against Russian interference in the election, according to a senior administration official.

 

Specifically, the White House wanted congressional leaders to sign off on a bipartisan statement urging state and local officials to take federal help in protecting their voting-registration and balloting machines from Russian cyber-intrusions.

 

Though U.S. intelligence agencies were skeptical that hackers would be able to manipulate the election results in a systematic way, the White House feared that Russia would attempt to do so, sowing doubt about the fundamental mechanisms of democracy and potentially forcing a more dangerous confrontation between Washington and Moscow.

 

[Putin denies that Russia hacked the DNC but says it was for the public good]

 

In a secure room in the Capitol used for briefings involving classified information, administration officials broadly laid out the evidence U.S. spy agencies had collected, showing Russia’s role in cyber-intrusions in at least two states and in hacking the emails of the Democratic organizations and individuals.

 

And they made a case for a united, bipartisan front in response to what one official described as “the threat posed by unprecedented meddling by a foreign power in our election process.”

 

The Democratic leaders in the room unanimously agreed on the need to take the threat seriously. Republicans, however, were divided, with at least two GOP lawmakers reluctant to accede to the White House requests.

 

According to several officials, McConnell raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.

 

Some of the Republicans in the briefing also seemed opposed to the idea of going public with such explosive allegations in the final stages of an election, a move that they argued would only rattle public confidence and play into Moscow’s hands.

 

McConnell’s office did not respond to a request for comment. After the election, Trump chose McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao, as his nominee for transportation secretary.

 

Some Clinton supporters saw the White House’s reluctance to act without bipartisan support as further evidence of an excessive caution in facing adversaries.

 

“The lack of an administration response on the Russian hacking cannot be attributed to Congress,” said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who was at the September meeting. “The administration has all the tools it needs to respond. They have the ability to impose sanctions. They have the ability to take clandestine means. The administration has decided not to utilize them in a way that would deter the Russians, and I think that’s a problem.”

 

Philip Rucker contributed to this report.

 

Source

Alternate Source - Intelligence Figures Fear Trump Reprisals Over Assessment Of Russia Election Role

 

Also Read:

 

[dMog]

and,,,,,suddenly seemingly out of the blue....  trump's new possible pick for sec state just happens to be an Exon oil exec who is , strangely enough, a personal friend of Putin and has done business with him and the Russian government...where are all the conspiracy  theories on this one......cause this one is firkin real and it stinks like dead and rotting skunk already

[knowledge-Spammer]

still so much hate for russian  sad

[Cerberus]

Its the media mainly starting crap.  They need ratings.  Anything to stir the pot.  If everyone would turn off their tv when the news is on maybe they would get the point.

[mclaren85]

Please USA. At least pretend to respect democracy.

[pc71520]

14 hours ago, vissha said:

These are the same people that said

Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

Remember this movie?

 

[CODYQX4]

The worthless cancer is getting voted out. Shillary is scum. Merkel is scum. But them being threatened with a loss or losing is Russian hacking?

 

I remember a few weeks ago, rigging the election was "unthinkable delusion" from "trailer trash Trump supporters", until of course the traitorous libtards like Shillary and Merkel get their plans impeded.

 

They can keep their globalization, Saudi bribes, deranged SJW supporters, and rapefugees the hell out of Western Democracies.

 

If Merkel or similar people win in your country, enjoy your decline and destruction.

[Enigmatism]

Turn off the TV, tune into Infowars. Simple solution to destroying the propaganda.

[steven36]

20 hours ago, Cerberus said:

Its the media mainly starting crap.  They need ratings.  Anything to stir the pot.  If everyone would turn off their tv when the news is on maybe they would get the point.

Yep this is fake and it's a waste of the tax papers  money  the liberals at the the white house  is going  milk every last dollar they can before they go home. By the time this news got  too this site it was old news and saying something and having actual  proof  is two different things . Obama  said he wanted it investigated and on his desk by the day he goes out of office what's  he going too do? He will not be in control no more . in 6 mths he will be forgotten? hes  having a hard time accepting this already.  lol .  

 

Dont believe me look at this he hates leaving office so bad  hes going set up a  post-presidency office in World Wildlife Fund headquarters  He's going to stay in DC like a idiot.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/digger/wp/2016/12/12/obama-to-open-post-presidency-office-in-world-wildlife-fund-headquarters/

 there were 5 other presidents  before  him that done this  but they were way more liked than Obama is! Trump should close him down lol.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/05/26/obama-might-call-kalorama-home-just-like-these-five-presidents-before-him/?utm_term=.4911e2a9cbe7

Another thing  the  liberal media are upset because they got it wrong on who was going to win and made them look bad and like a bunch of fakes witch they are. and this fake crap about Trump will go on for the next 4 years maybe 8 years. You  look back and look at the news  from a year ago  and you will  find 75%  is fiction today.  they dont have a good track record at all . People rather believe a lie than the truth and that's how they get away with it.    And the democrats are grasping straws trying too save there party . Republican president and a  Republican congress  things look bad for the democrats. Good riddance .. Happy Days are ahead !!!

 

If you want to hear what's really going tune in too talk radio  don't  let  the main stream media device you they post things too get hits is all and it seemed to work here look all the reply's. If the truth is posted people are not even  interested  lol  .

[flash48]

When Clinton lost the election, George Soros had a meeting with Democratic Leaders and the left wing news media on how to proceed. Here is part of their game plan:

 

 Organize anti Trump rallies

 Demand a recount

 Blame it on the Russians

 Scare the members of the electoral collage to not vote for Trump

 Spread rumors about Trump's cabinet picks

 More fake news on why Trump is unfit to be President

 Start a campaign to have Trump impeached

 

[Enigmatism]

8 hours ago, flash48 said:

When Clinton lost the election, George Soros had a meeting with Democratic Leaders and the left wing news media on how to proceed. Here is part of their game plan:

 

 Organize anti Trump rallies

 Demand a recount

 Blame it on the Russians

 Scare the members of the electoral collage to not vote for Trump

 Spread rumors about Trump's cabinet picks

 More fake news on why Trump is unfit to be President

 Start a campaign to have Trump impeached

 

 

Those in power (the world elite) absolutely HATE Trump and will stop at NOTHING to undermine him. As a last resort I'm pretty sure they will consider assassinating him, either that or continue to rile up fools who still whole heartedly believe the mainstream media to incite violence against Trump.

"Americanism NOT Globalism will be our Credo!" - Donald Trump

 

This is why the world elite HATE Trump with a hell fire passion of sorts. He is ANTI New World Order. The ones who STILL do not know about the plans to create a NWO out of utter chaos will be used as pawns to continue an insane plan to help destabilize the country and the world. The problem with those that listen to and believe CNN is not that they haven't been told the truth about total corruption in high places, it is that they see evil as mere POWER and are attracted to it not understanding that it will consume them in the end of this all too. They feel the reflected glory of the world elite and think that THEY are a part of that, not knowing that they are just simple PAWNS.

 

In order for ANY sort of new world order to be a GOOD thing, it must be 100% voted by the people of the world and WE must help formulate those global rules. This is NOT what is happening behind the scenes with the current formation of the new world order system. For years if anyone even mentioned the new world order system, you were called a conspiracy theorist but now as it is nearing a completion (but we played the Trump card to halt it!) they are coming out with it more and more, making it obvious and open to see. In this new world order system that the current world elite are trying to push threw, you the ordinary person have no right to help create the rules and regulations, you are FORCED to accept whatever rules they force down your throat.

 

This is why Trump is so hated and lied about in mainstream media. They will not stop...and neither will the Infowarriors. NEVER.

[Pequi]

On domingo, 11 de dezembro de 2016 at 9:49 PM, knowledge said:

still so much hate for russian  sad

Not hate. Admiration. Putin is a mastermind of political manipulation. If you are Russian, that's a good thing.

If you're not Russian ---> read the denials.

 

[steven36]

7 hours ago, Pequi said:

Not hate. Admiration. Putin is a mastermind of political manipulation. If you are Russian, that's a good thing.

If you're not Russian ---> read the denials.

 

look at the denials?  if you didnt do something you should deny it lol. l I like to see some real proof?  If you don’t have any  you’re just spreading conspiracy  theories like the left is  you are accusing people of it. Some states that recounted votes Trump got more than he had before it just made her look worse. Like I said this was old news by the time it got  here.

 

Today there saying it was the FBI fault for publishing her emails

Quote

 

Current FBI Director James Comey also insists, notwithstanding the FBI’s previous transgressions, today’s Bureau truly is outside and above politics. However, numerous leading political and news media figures from across the political spectrum explicitly assert the FBI repeatedly and with significant impact affected the outcome of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election," Leopold and Shapiro's attorney, Jeffrey Light, wrote in the complaint.

 

 

The suit was assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Randolph Moss, an appointee of President Barack Obama.

 

 

FBI sued for files on election-era probes

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/12/fbi-election-investigations-lawsuit-232574

Now there  claiming the FBI  caused her too lose every day since Trump won they are blame it on something but they don’t have no proof . It's a journalist suing  the FBI leave it to libtrads lol.

 

If you're not Russian you’re better off not having someone that should had went to jail back when her husband was  president and the only reason she didn’t was because she was the presidents wife  . If a normal person  would of went to jail  a long time ago. that's why she didn’t win she's a 2 face crook .

 

From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Clinton-Scandal Primer
 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/tracking-the-clinton-controversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/

The Election was rigged alight and it was the democrats who done it  . If dead people  and illegal immigrants  didn’t vote and  if they did recount by hand Trump would had won the popular vote too.

 

Without Illegal Vote Tally Trump Would Have Won Popular Vote in a Landslide – Get Over It Snowflakes

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/subtract-the-illegals-and-trump-won-the-popular-vote-in-a-landslide-get-over-it-snowflakes/

 

 

[steven36]

 

Quote

 

The Popular Vote Is A Hoax

 

 

Enough whining about how Hillary’s “victory” in the popular vote reflects the people’s “real” choice for president. As recently as October, Democrats were calling popular vote systems racist; and besides, dumping the Electoral College may not even be constitutionally possible. I voted for Hillary, but liberal contortions to invalidate her loss by rewriting the rules exasperate me. The “popular vote” is a fake construct, a hoax that measures nothing of significance.

 

 

Preposterously, since the election some leading Democrats have been calling the Electoral College racist and even akin to slavery. But usually leftists argue the opposite – that popular vote systems are racist, not those that count by jurisdictions. Heavily Democratic California passed a voting-rights law in 2001 that allowed minority groups to sue cities with “at-large” systems of electing councilmembers. Supporters of such laws argue that citywide systems (the popular vote) stifle minority voices, and thus only Electoral College-like district elections ensure racial fairness.

Ever since, dozens of cities and school districts in California have abandoned popular-vote systems in favor of districts, to the rejoicing of left-wing proponents of populist inclusiveness. A Latino Democrat trying to dismember popular voting in Santa Monica complained of waiting “more than 70 years for fair elections and it’s not in the best interest of residents to continue to live under a rigged political system.”

 

 

Wait, I thought the Electoral College was rigged and the popular vote was fair. I guess it depends which system helps liberal candidates more.

 

 

Not that it matters much, because a popular-vote constitutional amendment would probably be unconstitutional. That seeming absurdity dates to a wrinkle the Founding Fathers ironed out in drafting the Constitution. The Electoral College is based on the two-chamber legislative structure known as the Connecticut Compromise, which gave big states like Virginia representation by population in the House; and small states like New Jersey an equal voice in the Senate.

 

 

After that careful balancing act, the Founders froze their hard work with the only permanent exception to the provision allowing constitutional amendments: that the Connecticut Compromise could not be repealed without the consent of every affected state (look it up: Article V).

 

 

In any event, there is no “popular vote” – or at least there wasn’t in 2016. In sports, nobody would crown a winner using results recalculated under different rules; why should politics be any different? Though the Seattle Mariners won 116 games in 2001, far more than any other baseball team, nobody gave them championship rings. Those went to the Arizona Diamondbacks, who won the World Series. Sure, winning games is very important in baseball – just like winning votes is in politics – but everyone knows it’s not how you win the top prize.

 

 

The very contours of this year’s campaign would have been different under a popular-vote system, so Hillary Clinton’s supposed 2.7 million-vote lead is a meaningless statistic.

In fact, the nominees themselves might very well have been different without the Electoral College. Candidates garner primary endorsements, volunteers, donations, and votes based mostly on their case that they would be the strongest nominee in November – under the rules of the Electoral College. Marco Rubio, to take one example, may have looked like a stronger 2016 nominee under a popular vote system, because votes from his fellow Latinos in Texas and California would matter, whereas they barely register in the Electoral College. If Trump – or Hillary – had lost the nomination, what relevance would her 2.7 million-vote margin have then?

 

 

A popular vote campaign would focus on different issues. For example, the desires of voters in oil-rich red states like Texas and Alaska were muted in 2016, as were the economic concerns of voters in heavily urbanized blue states like New Jersey and Massachusetts. Debates, TV commercials, campaign flare-ups – all would have been different if every vote counted the same. It would literally have been a different election. The popular vote totals are useful, I guess, for writers of Hillary Clinton fan fiction and trivia nights 20 years from now – but nothing more.

 

 

Presidents win under the Constitution’s rules, full stop. If each county got one vote, Trump would have been elected in a landslide. Who cares? If every resident of America (including felons, 17-year-olds, and illegal immigrants) was allowed to vote, Hillary would have dominated. Who cares? In presidential elections, there are no moral victories – only victories. Even for those of us who don’t like it, the victor this time was Donald J. Trump.

 

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/07/the-popular-vote-is-a-hoax/

 

[dMog]

popular vote does solve all problems... it creates only a new set of voting issues...   Canada does  not have an electoral college,,, the two most populated provinces almost always decide the federal election... because of the differences in time zones the election is most time decided before the rest of the country has even counted a single vote... nothing wrong with the electoral college in the USA,,,NO MATTER WHAT FORM GETS USED POLITICAL PARTIES WILL ALWAYS FIND WAYS TO EXPLOIT IT... trump won the vote fair and square the dems lost and have to honestly look at why that happened... and  no way was that  there was  millions and millions  of dead people voting on either side,,, that's horse puck thinking from horse puck web sites 

[Enigmatism]

4 hours ago, dMog said:

popular vote does solve all problems... it creates only a new set of voting issues...   Canada does  not have an electoral college,,, the two most populated provinces almost always decide the federal election... because of the differences in time zones the election is most time decided before the rest of the country has even counted a single vote... nothing wrong with the electoral college in the USA,,,NO MATTER WHAT FORM GETS USED POLITICAL PARTIES WILL ALWAYS FIND WAYS TO EXPLOIT IT... trump won the vote fair and square the dems lost and have to honestly look at why that happened... and  no way was that  there was  millions and millions  of dead people voting on either side,,, that's horse puck thinking from horse puck web sites 

 

It's not that actual zombies rose from the dead or something and voted, it's that people came in under the NAME of the dead people and voted FOR THEM. The Dems wanted as many votes as possible and so they also used the help of illegal immigrants to vote as well, especially since many voting areas DID NOT require you to even have an ID or Drivers license to vote! Have a look at this stunt that proves it:

 

 

[dMog]

3 hours ago, Enigmatism said:

 

It's not that actual zombies rose from the dead or something and voted, it's that people came in under the NAME of the dead people and voted FOR THEM. The Dems wanted as many votes as possible and so they also used the help of illegal immigrants to vote as well, especially since many voting areas DID NOT require you to even have an ID or Drivers license to vote! Have a look at this stunt that proves it:

 

 

 

as i said...millions dead people did not vote ... no way no how  to think it happened in ANY WAY shape or form from any conspiracy or fake news sites proof of concept you gotta have a rock for brain ...no matter how hard you wish it to be true it just never happened in the numbers that are claimed

[sternog]

By the way, dMog: most of the atrocities attributed to the Russians and Assad`s regime in Syria are lies as well (if you can believe your fellow countrywoman):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1VNQGsiP8M

But if you prefer to stay a walking zombie who stuck in the 60-s of the 20th century with communist scaremongering, it`s no use talking to you.

[Enigmatism]

8 minutes ago, sternog said:

By the way, dMog: most of the atrocities attributed to the Russians and Assad`s regime in Syria are lies as well (if you can believe your fellow countrywoman):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1VNQGsiP8M

But if you prefer to stay a walking zombie who stuck in the 60-s of the 20th century with communist scaremongering, it`s no use talking to you.

 

I think dMog knows full well and isn't ignorant. He has simply chosen a side. He can't see truth for truth and would rather believe lies. You can show him all the proof in the world but to HIM, it's nothing more than conspiracy theories...and oh yeah, now it's considered fake news. There is no reasoning with him where as many people would recognize that they were wrong, he seemingly will NEVER do that. If a person is duped with actual false info and place their whole heart into it, rather than admitting that they were wrong and progressing in truth they will often times DOUBLE DOWN on their beliefs and continue to be duped because the alternative option is being heart broken and sinking into a very dark depression. I don't want to attack dMog as there are many people just like him and I truly feel for them.

[pc71520]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUyJV6YaSWY

 

[jamesDDI]