posted February 16, 2017 04:27 AM            

Its determination is contrary to unjustifiable assertions by senior DNC officials, Obama, the Clinton campaign, administration-connected cyber espionage experts and mainstream media – pointing fingers the wrong way.”

Ok, so corroboration for Wikileaks' assertion that Russia was not the source of the leak.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/israeli-intelligence-debunks-notion-of-russi a-hacking-dnc-emails/5538966

In related news, German Intel Clears Russia on Interference, Mainstream U.S. media only wants stories of Russian perfidy

“ . . . Exclusive: Mainstream U.S. media only wants stories of Russian perfidy, so when German intelligence cleared Moscow of suspected subversion of German democracy, the silence was deafening, says ex-CIA analyst Ray McGovern.

“ . . . Whereas former CIA Director John Brennan prevailed on his analysts to resort to anemic, evidence-light reasoning “assessing” that Russia tried to tip the U.S. election to Donald Trump, Berlin’s intelligence agencies found the evidence lacking and have now completed their investigation.

So, we probably won't be hearing this from the U.S. mainstream media.

posted February 16, 2017 05:22 AM            

"Blaming Russia is a convenient way to shift attention from a legally challenged, illegitimately anointed Democrat party nominee – the greatest threat to world peace in modern memory."

Did you cut this sentence out by mistake, or was it on purpose that you chose to hide the open agenda of the author of the article.

You make his stance more objective than its is. Nothing wrong with me, I lean towards that end of the spectrum too, but let's not pretend that this non mainstream info is fair and unbiased just because it doesn't get broadcasted on cnn or other mainstream tv.

posted February 16, 2017 09:56 AM            

Not sure why you're making an issue out of this statement being left out of the post.

Hillary Clinton was and still is legally challenged. Hillary Clinton is a criminal of long standing who violated the espionage laws of the US by passing secret, top secret and "code word" secret information to people who don't have security clearances to view the information. Additionally, Hillary kept this national security information on an unsecured server.

Hillary Clinton was a illegitimate choice the democrats decided to anoint as their candidate. Hillary Clinton...by the laws of the United States, was disqualified, (by law) from holding any public office.

posted February 16, 2017 02:55 PM            

This article parallels the inactive link in last line of OP

posted February 17, 2017 11:02 PM            

It always amazes me that, having noticed the MSM "omit and embroider", you lot can't see thru the Bitebarfs of the media.. as bad if not worse. Not only have they been skewering Clinton for 30 years, they are now infesting the WH and nobody puts 2+2 together.

And how do you overlook Bannon's Lenin-worship and expressed desire to destroy the country?

posted February 17, 2017 11:57 PM            

There's lots of facts to be discovered. Such as...who committed federal felonies by releasing classified information to the idiot leftist press.

Not to mention, who decided to release and who actually did release the name of a private US citizen to the idiot leftist press in conjunction to a listened in on telephone conversation...WITHOUT a court order or other authorization to tape a US citizen's conversations. Another Federal Felony offense.

posted February 18, 2017 02:51 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pire:
Quote end of article :

"Blaming Russia is a convenient way to shift attention from a legally challenged, illegitimately anointed Democrat party nominee – the greatest threat to world peace in modern memory."

---

Are you aware that Clinton was under two FBI investigations while she was running for president? One of the people running for the top spot as DNC chair publicly admitted that the Democratic primary was rigged in Clinton's favor. The Russian hacking story was promoted by the Clinton campaign to deflect attention from her Email scandal. And, he's probably alluding to Clinton's antipathy toward Russia and the likelihood of war had she won. Stating facts is not evidence of bias. But, yes, "greatest threat to peace in modern memory, that is over the top.

quote:

---

Did you cut this sentence out by mistake, or was it on purpose that you chose to hide the open agenda of the author of the article.

You make his stance more objective than its is. Nothing wrong with me, I lean towards that end of the spectrum too, but let's not pretend that this non mainstream info is fair and unbiased just because it doesn't get broadcasted on cnn or other mainstream tv.

---

What? Cut this sentence out? I quoted the gist of the article, no editing was involved. You're reading nefarious motives into this where there aren't any. The author is critical of Clinton, that doesn't take away from the conclusions of Israeli Intel about Russian hacking of DNC emails. The author is not the intel analyst who made the determination so his views of Clinton are irrelevant.

posted February 18, 2017 03:06 AM            

Bipartisan allegations that Trump is a “puppet” of or “compromised” by the Kremlin have grown into latter-day McCarthyism with grave threats to America and the world.

"Cohen regrets the subject of tonight’s discussion. He prefers to focus his decades of scholarly study and personal experience on loftier developments in Russia and issues in US-Russian relations. But the bipartisan, nearly full-political-spectrum tsunami of allegations that President Trump has been seditiously “compromised” by the Kremlin (Thomas Friedman, New York Times, February 15), with scarcely any non-partisan pushback at any influential political or media levels—and without any yet verified facts—is deeply alarming. Begun by the Clinton campaign in mid 2016, and exemplified now by the strident innuendos of MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and equally unbalanced bookings at CNN and elsewhere, the practice is growing into a kind of latter-day McCarthyite red-baiting and hysteria. Such politically malignant practices are to be deplored anywhere they appear, without exception, whether on the part of conservatives or liberals or progressives. They are driven by political forces with various agendas: the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party that wants to maintain its grip on the party in its internal struggle ahead by insisting she did not lose the election but it was stolen by Russian President Putin for Trump; by enemies of Trump’s proposed détente with Russia, who want to discredit both him and Putin; by Republicans and Democrats outraged that Trump essentially ran and won without either party, thereby threatening the established two-party system, etc. Whatever the motivating factors, the ensuing slurring of Trump, which is already producing calls for his impeachment, poses grave threats to US and international security and to American democracy itself."

posted February 18, 2017 03:15 AM            

"...But the crux of pro-Kremlin allegations against Trump was, and remains, the charge that Putin hacked the DNC and disseminated the stolen e-mails through WikiLeaks in order to put Trump in the White House. A summary of these “facts” was presented in a declassified report released by the “intelligence community” and widely published in January 2017. Though it has since become axiomatic proof for Trump’s political and media enemies, virtually nothing in the report’s some 13 pages of text is persuasive. About half the pages are assumptions—or “assessments”—based on surmised motivations, not factual evidence of a Russian operation on behalf of Trump. The other half is merely an outdated evaluation deploring broadcasts by the Kremlin-funded television network RT, at worst a run-of-the-mill “propaganda” outlet. (Some viewers think that its Washington bureau, staffed by many Americans, favored Bernie Sanders, not Trump.) Moreover, a number of American hacking experts insist that Russian state hackers would have left no fingerprints, as US intelligence claimed they had. Indeed, the group Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity believes that the damaging DNC documents were not hacked but leaked by an insider. If so, it had nothing to do with Russia at all. (The NSA, which has the capacity to monitor the movement of e-mails, was only “moderately confident” in the report it co-signed, while the CIA and the FBI were “highly confident.”) Still more, at his final presidential press conference, Obama referred to the DNC scandal as a leak, not a hack, and said he did not know how the e-mails got to WikiLeaks—this despite the allegations by his own intelligence agencies. (No one seems to have asked Obama if he misspoke!) On the other side of this alleged conspiracy, nor is it clear that Putin so favored the erratic Trump that he would have taken such a risk, which if discovered would presumably have compromised Trump and greatly favored Clinton. Judging from discussions in Kremlin-related Russian newspapers, there was a serious debate as to which American presidential candidate might be best—or least bad—for Russia."

posted February 18, 2017 11:45 AM            

I have lots of reservations about the whole Russia putsch.. but yes, the authors opinion is so out of scale that it matters. As in it is likely that they are influenced by that opinion to notice articles that support it, and discount those that don't.

I do think there is Russian interference and propaganda posing as news everywhere. There is also US interference, British interference, Saudi interference, Israeli..etcetcetc

The Internet has made this so much easier and it is the least costly, safest way to win over people..tho slow and somewhat subject to the possibility that people might use critical thinking skills..