Trial begins ion Russian hacking

[dukkha]

Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims
https://www.realclearinvestigations....ng_claims.html


The report uses qualified and vague language to describe key events, indicating that Mueller and his investigators do not actually know for certain whether Russian intelligence officers stole Democratic Party emails, or how those emails were transferred to WikiLeaks.

The report's timeline of events appears to defy logic. According to its narrative, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange announced the publication of Democratic Party emails not only before he received the documents but before he even communicated with the source that provided them.

There is strong reason to doubt Mueller’s suggestion that an alleged Russian cutout called Guccifer 2.0 supplied the stolen emails to Assange.

Mueller’s decision not to interview Assange – a central figure who claims Russia was not behind the hack – suggests an unwillingness to explore avenues of evidence on fundamental questions.

U.S. intelligence officials cannot make definitive conclusions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee computer servers because they did not analyze those servers themselves. Instead, they relied on the forensics of CrowdStrike, a private contractor for the DNC that was not a neutral party, much as “Russian dossier” compiler Christopher Steele, also a DNC contractor, was not a neutral party. This puts two Democrat-hired contractors squarely behind underlying allegations in the affair – a key circumstance that Mueller ignores.

Further, the government allowed CrowdStrike and the Democratic Party's legal counsel to submit redacted records, meaning CrowdStrike and not the government decided what could be revealed or not regarding evidence of hacking.

Mueller’s report conspicuously does not allege that the Russian government carried out the social media campaign. Instead it blames, as Mueller said in his closing remarks, "a private Russian entity" known as the Internet Research Agency (IRA).

Mueller also falls far short of proving that the Russian social campaign was sophisticated, or even more than minimally related to the 2016 election. As with the collusion and Russian hacking allegations, Democratic officials had a central and overlooked hand in generating the alarm about Russian social media activity.

John Brennan, then director of the CIA, played a seminal and overlooked role in all facets of what became Mueller’s investigation: the suspicions that triggered the initial collusion probe; the allegations of Russian interference; and the intelligence assessment that purported to validate the interference allegations that Brennan himself helped generate. Yet Brennan has since revealed himself to be, like CrowdStrike and Steele, hardly a neutral party -- in fact a partisan with a deep animus toward Trump.

[Darth Omar]

Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims
https://www.realclearinvestigations....ng_claims.html


The report uses qualified and vague language to describe key events, indicating that Mueller and his investigators do not actually know for certain whether Russian intelligence officers stole Democratic Party emails, or how those emails were transferred to WikiLeaks.

The report's timeline of events appears to defy logic. According to its narrative, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange announced the publication of Democratic Party emails not only before he received the documents but before he even communicated with the source that provided them.

There is strong reason to doubt Mueller’s suggestion that an alleged Russian cutout called Guccifer 2.0 supplied the stolen emails to Assange.

Mueller’s decision not to interview Assange – a central figure who claims Russia was not behind the hack – suggests an unwillingness to explore avenues of evidence on fundamental questions.

U.S. intelligence officials cannot make definitive conclusions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee computer servers because they did not analyze those servers themselves. Instead, they relied on the forensics of CrowdStrike, a private contractor for the DNC that was not a neutral party, much as “Russian dossier” compiler Christopher Steele, also a DNC contractor, was not a neutral party. This puts two Democrat-hired contractors squarely behind underlying allegations in the affair – a key circumstance that Mueller ignores.

Further, the government allowed CrowdStrike and the Democratic Party's legal counsel to submit redacted records, meaning CrowdStrike and not the government decided what could be revealed or not regarding evidence of hacking.

Mueller’s report conspicuously does not allege that the Russian government carried out the social media campaign. Instead it blames, as Mueller said in his closing remarks, "a private Russian entity" known as the Internet Research Agency (IRA).

Mueller also falls far short of proving that the Russian social campaign was sophisticated, or even more than minimally related to the 2016 election. As with the collusion and Russian hacking allegations, Democratic officials had a central and overlooked hand in generating the alarm about Russian social media activity.

John Brennan, then director of the CIA, played a seminal and overlooked role in all facets of what became Mueller’s investigation: the suspicions that triggered the initial collusion probe; the allegations of Russian interference; and the intelligence assessment that purported to validate the interference allegations that Brennan himself helped generate. Yet Brennan has since revealed himself to be, like CrowdStrike and Steele, hardly a neutral party -- in fact a partisan with a deep animus toward Trump.

It’s inconceivable that Mullet wouldn’t interview Assange.

That is, if it was an *honest investigation* that sought to rule-out alternative theories. I knew right then it was a charade.

[dukkha]

It’s inconceivable that Mullet wouldn’t interview Assange.

That is, if it was an *honest investigation* that sought to rule-out alternative theories. I knew right then it was a charade.

that and the conjured up "Russian cutout" needed to complete the farce that WIKI is a Russian asset

[evince]

https://www.law.com/nationallawjourn...20190819100108



The Judge tells the assholes who have been trying to stretch this out says "If I left it up to you this trial would nt start until 2021"



Americans get to read trail transcripts



Trump is fucked

A federal judge on Monday pressed lawyers to prepare for an April trial in the prosecution of a Russian company charged with interfering in the 2016 presidential election, expressing frustration over delays in a case that was originally brought by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s office.

[evince]

Are you claiming American courts try FAKE CASES???????

[TOP]

A federal judge on Monday pressed lawyers to prepare for an April trial in the prosecution of a Russian company charged with interfering in the 2016 presidential election, expressing frustration over delays in a case that was originally brought by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s office.

Keep us posted

[evince]

its real you idiots

[evince]

https://www.law.com/nationallawjourn...20190819100108



The Judge tells the assholes who have been trying to stretch this out says "If I left it up to you this trial would nt start until 2021"



Americans get to read trail transcripts



Trump is fucked

A federal judge on Monday pressed lawyers to prepare for an April trial in the prosecution of a Russian company charged with interfering in the 2016 presidential election, expressing frustration over delays in a case that was originally brought by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s office.

[Earl]

No collusion and insufficient evidence to pursue obstruction.

Case closed-McConnell.

Remember Rosenstein: No Vote Counts or Election Results Were Changed

[evince]

then why are we trying Russians idiot?

[evince]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8181046.html



How a Dutch intelligence agency secretly hacked into the Kremlin’s most notorious hacking group
Reports claim Netherlands alerted Washington of influence in 2016 presidential elections after officials watched Russian group bypass Democratic National Committee and other operations
Rick Noack
Saturday 27 January 2018 16:03








The organisation were said to be based near the Red Square in Moscow ( AFP/Getty )
Dutch domestic intelligence service AIVD had access to the infamous Russian hacking group Cozy Bear for at least a year starting in mid-2014, local media outlets said on Thursday.
According to the reports, the Dutch government alerted the United States to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections after Netherlands-based officials watched the hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and other operations by the Russians, including a 2014 State Department hack.

The DNC hack, revealed by The Washington Post in June 2016, was considered a pivotal event in a series of actions believed to be undertaken by the Russian government to meddle in the US presidential election that year. Two independent research firms later confirmed that the DNC's network was compromised by Russian government hackers.



Read more


Donald Trump 'ordered firing' of Russia investigator Robert Mueller


Republican senator plans to release Trump Jr interview transcript


Jeff Sessions interviewed by Robert Mueller's investigation
The Dutch agency's involvement was first reported by current affairs programme Nieuwsuur and newspaper de Volkskrant on Thursday. Reached by The Washington Post on Friday, the domestic spy agency AIVD had no comment. The Dutch military intelligence service, MIVD, did not respond to a request for comment.

According to Dutch media, AIVD agents also watched when Russian hackers launched an attack at the State Department in 2014, and compromised unclassified systems at the White House as well as in Congress.

Cold hard facts



And they will do it again

[evince]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...e25_story.html



Trump had this case shut down before it came due

[evince]

The Internet Research Agency, based in St. Petersburg, was named in the indictment as the hub of efforts to allegedly trick Americans online into following and promoting Russian-fed propaganda. The material, prosecutors said, pushed voters toward then-Republican candidate Donald Trump and away from Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.
Facebook’s former chief security officer, Alex Stamos, who oversaw the social media giant’s investigation of the disinformation campaign, said he was disappointed by the Justice Department’s decision.