Intel Panel Abruptly Nixes Briefing on Alleged Russian Interference in US Election

[Vyxn]

Intel Panel Abruptly Nixes Briefing on Alleged Russian Interference in US Election After Resistance

By Catherine Herridge*
Published December 15, 2016* FoxNews.com
The House Intelligence Committee abruptly canceled a briefing set for Thursday on alleged Russian interference in the U.S. election, after the CIA declined to provide a briefer for the session, Fox News is told.
Amid concerns about reports that conflict with details previously provided to the committee, Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., had requested a closed, classified briefing Thursday for committee Republican and Democratic members from the FBI, CIA, Office of the Director of National Intelligence and National Security Agency.
But Fox News is told the CIA declined citing its focus on the full review requested by President Obama, and the other agencies did not respond to the committee’s request, which is unusual given the panel is the most-senior committee with jurisdiction.

"It is unacceptable that the Intelligence Community directors would not fulfill the House Intelligence Committee’s request to be briefed tomorrow on the cyber-attacks that occurred during the presidential campaign," Nunes said in a statement. "The Committee is deeply concerned that intransigence in sharing intelligence with Congress can enable the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes."
Nunes also had given the agencies until Friday to address conflicts in the record.
In response to Fox News' initial report, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which oversees all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies, issued a statement claiming that lawmakers from both parties have received "extensive, detailed classified and unclassified briefings ... since last summer and have continued to do so after Election Day."
"Last week, the President ordered a full Intelligence Community review of foreign efforts to influence recent Presidential elections – from 2008 to present," the statement added. "Once the review is complete in the coming weeks, the Intelligence Community stands ready to brief Congress—and will make those findings available to the public consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We will not offer any comment until the review is complete."
A Washington Post report Friday, citing anonymous sources, said the CIA determined Russia interfered in the election with the purpose of helping Trump’s campaign. But, as Nunes first noted in a letter Monday, DNI James Clapper told their committee on Nov. 17 that the intelligence community lacked strong evidence connecting Russia to the WikiLeaks disclosures.
http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/12/15...election-after

so the CIA was asked by the he House Intelligence Committee to produce evidence of the Russian hacking and evidence that the Russians released the content of what they hacked to help Trump get elected, and what does the CIA do? it refuses to do so. The basic put up or shut up challenge was given and the CIA couldn't put up

So all we have is some anonymous sources given to a known Trump hating bias partisan fake news rag the WaPo and when proof is asked to be given the agency that the sources supposedly belong to fail to give such proof

[TZucchini]

We already have evidence.

It's all sourced, and cited, here.

[Daelak]

We already have evidence.

It's all sourced, and cited, here.

Shhhhh, we must keep up the 'CIA has nothing' angle to distract people from the largest cyber attack on the west in history.

[crewskater]

If Russia didn't do any tampering to the votes, there really isn't an issue here. All they did was uncover what our shady politicians are up to.

[McFuu]

Didn't the WH make an announcement days ago that Russia had no effect on our election. That's coming straight from the administration that has something to gain from a "Russian hack".

[Vyxn]

We already have evidence.

It's all sourced, and cited, here.

and it is full of sentence like this
There appears to be strong, yet still circumstantial,
are believed to be closely
In our original hypothesis,

it is full of assumptions, speculation, opinions and assertions with very little or none hard evidence proving with out a reasonable doubt that indeed the Russian did it and no proof or mention the Russians did so and released it to help trump

and I wont even mention your source you used Reddit come on you should know better then that and also these are private companies hired by the DNC they aren't credible law enforcement or investigation agencies

[fengosa]

Vyxn isn`t even trying. Not sure how he gets we have nothing out of this.

"Once the review is complete in the coming weeks, the Intelligence Community stands ready to brief Congress—and will make those findings available to the public consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We will not offer any comment until the review is complete."

[TZucchini]

also these are private companies hired by the DNC they aren't credible law enforcement or investigation agencies

These are third party, independent cyber security firms. In other words, the exact people you'd want to go to in order to determine the source of the hack.

I mean, who exactly would you trust? The CIA? You've already ridiculed them in the original post.

Where do you want this information to come from?

[Vyxn]

These are third party, independent cyber security firms. In other words, the exact people you'd want to go to in order to determine the source of the hack.

I mean, who exactly would you trust? The CIA? You've already ridiculed them in the original post.

Where do you want this information to come from?

there not independent they was getting paid by the DNC

and i will trust the CIA when they release hard proof beyond a reasonable doubt and after it is reviewed by others to verify that proof but I wont believe some anonymous source released by a Trump hating bias fake news outlet like the WaPo

[TZucchini]

there not independent they was getting paid by the DNC

They were paid to perform a service. I.E. they're an INDEPENDENT contractor. Independent means "Not affiliated with", "Not influenced by".

But again, who do you want to conduct this investigation? You certainly won't trust any organization under Obama's control, right?

[Azadina]

They were paid to perform a service. I.E. they're an INDEPENDENT contractor. Independent means "Not affiliated with", "Not influenced by".

But again, who do you want to conduct this investigation? You certainly won't trust any organization under Obama's control, right?

Trump or foxnews obviously, with no oversight.

[Vyxn]

Vyxn isn`t even trying. Not sure how he gets we have nothing out of this.

"Once the review is complete in the coming weeks, the Intelligence Community stands ready to brief Congress—and will make those findings available to the public consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We will not offer any comment until the review is complete."

sure typical tactic drag it out so the damage has already occurred the false narrative has been fully established and accepted

just like the hands up don't shot narrative by the time it was debunked the narrative was already established the damage was already done

[Felya]

there not independent they was getting paid by the DNC

Neither is Trump denying it ever happened, despite what happened to Manafold and his current appointments. Despite an interview where his previous boasting of a relationship with Putin, resulted in Trump channeling Bill Clinton, with his "depends on the meaning of relationship".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Politkovskaya

[It] is we who are responsible for Putin's policies ... [s]ociety has shown limitless apathy ... [a]s the Chekists have become entrenched in power, we have let them see our fear, and thereby have only intensified their urge to treat us like cattle. The KGB respects only the strong. The weak it devours. We of all people ought to know that.

We are hurtling back into a Soviet abyss, into an information vacuum that spells death from our own ignorance. All we have left is the internet, where information is still freely available. For the rest, if you want to go on working as a journalist, it's total servility to Putin. Otherwise, it can be death, the bullet, poison, or trial—whatever our special services, Putin's guard dogs, see fit.

Compare her execution date, to Putin's birthday... what a hoot... this was all said many years before Trump's political aspirations.

[Bodakane]

DNI says:

https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsro...-u-s-elections

Senior Administration Officials have regularly provided extensive, detailed classified and unclassified briefings to members and staff from both parties on Capitol Hill since this past summer and have continued to do so after Election Day.

Last week, the President ordered a full Intelligence Community review of foreign efforts to influence recent Presidential elections – from 2008 to present. Once the review is complete in the coming weeks, the Intelligence Community stands ready to brief Congress—and will make those findings available to the public consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We will not offer any comment until the review is complete.

Hopefully this ends the Trumpers screaming about there's no evidence.

[Felya]

sure typical tactic drag it out so the damage has already occurred the false narrative has been fully established and accepted

just like the hands up don't shut narrative by the time it was debunked the narrative was already established the damage was already done

Are you talking about Wikileaks and Clinton's emails/Benghazi? You are projecting...

[Dug]

If Russia didn't do any tampering to the votes, there really isn't an issue here. All they did was uncover what our shady democratic politicians are up to.

FTFY. The leaks also uncovered republican dirt. Of course that wasn't shown because they're trying to influence voters... which worked.

[Stormdash]

Enough evidence to leak to press, not enough to tell the House under penalty of perjury, though. Funny how that works. Not to mention, not even an allegation that Russia did anything that affected either the counting of votes or legal participation in the election. The most severe allegations anybody has made against Russia are thing that, if true, still wouldn't delegitimize the outcome.

[Felya]

DNI says:

https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsro...-u-s-elections

Hopefully this ends the Trumpers screaming about there's no evidence.

Hopefully Trump supporters are right, I'd rather we weren't swindled by KGB.

[Vyxn]

They were paid to perform a service. I.E. they're an INDEPENDENT contractor. Independent means "Not affiliated with", "Not influenced by".

But again, who do you want to conduct this investigation? You certainly won't trust any organization under Obama's control, right?

when you are on the pay role you are "affiliated with"

so then you believe when an oil company contracts the services of some scientist to do some studies those studies are independent from the oil company and credible?

[The Emperor]

Neither is Trump denying it ever happened, despite what happened to Manafold and his current appointments. Despite an interview where his previous boasting of a relationship with Putin, resulted in Trump channeling Bill Clinton, with his "depends on the meaning of relationship".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Politkovskaya





Compare her execution date, to Putin's birthday... what a hoot... this was all said many years before Trump's political separation.

This is relevant how?

OT: No surprise here, CIA got nothing, just wishes some more time to try and find something remotely close to the evidence. If not, they'd just make another political statement, or simply classify the results of review.