US spy chief promises Putin motive

[Deleted]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38521503

The US intelligence chief has promised to explain why Russia allegedly meddled in the US presidential election.

Director of National Intelligence General James Clapper said Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the hack of Democratic Party emails, and the motive will be revealed next week.

But Mr Clapper stopped short of saying it was "an act of war".

Russia has denied involvement but the US has announced sanctions against Russian officials.

A report on foreign meddling in US elections was given to President Barack Obama on Thursday.

President-elect Donald Trump is to be briefed on the report on Friday and the unclassified version will be made public next week.

Top US intelligence officials were giving testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee investigating the alleged interference.
In their assessment, Moscow interfered to help Mr Trump, the Republican candidate, beat Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Do you think Trump will continue putting himself before his country by denying such accusations from his own intelligence? Irrespective of the election however I find such accusations quite scary if indeed true

[Skaiz]

I think I need to see said information before reacting. Seems kind of retarded to judge before evidence. I'm expecting a zoomed in picture of the hacking mini-game of Fallout 4 as the evidence.

[Dextroden]

So, do they actually have evidence? Is it evidence different from the proof the CIA supposedly have?

[Dug]

Well I mean the motive is pretty clear. He views Trump as a weak leader that he can walk all over. I'm inclined to agree but dudes also mad unpredictable so it can come back to bite Putin.

[TZucchini]

So, do they actually have evidence?

I think we need to understand the difference between evidence and proof. In terms of intelligence gathering, I think it's impossible to provide 100% incontrovertible proof that Russian state actors were responsible for the email hacks. It's why we make assessments based on the available evidence.

Is there evidence? Yes. There's a shit ton that's publicly available. I'm sure there's a lot more that will remain classified (as it should).

[Tommi]

In their assessment, Moscow interfered to help Mr Trump, the Republican candidate, beat Democrat Hillary Clinton.

And the difference between that and the US doing is? I see no difference at all from the US installing puppets in other countries, but when it happens to the good old righteous USA, THEN ITS WAR AND BULLSHIT AND PEOPLE WILL DIE!!

[stabetha]

I think we need to understand the difference between evidence and proof. In terms of intelligence gathering, I think it's impossible to provide 100% incontrovertible proof that Russian state actors were responsible for the email hacks. It's why we make assessments based on the available evidence.

Is there evidence? Yes. There's a shit ton that's publicly available. I'm sure there's a lot more that will remain classified (as it should).

that "shit ton" is purely circumstantial

[TZucchini]

Well I mean the motive is pretty clear. He views Trump as a weak leader that he can walk all over. I'm inclined to agree but dudes also mad unpredictable so it can come back to bite Putin.

The President elect is publicly questioning intelligence officers within the Federal Government, while praising Putin and Assange.

Do you think Russia has succeeded in making America look weak?

[Felya]

that "shit ton" is purely circumstantial

Yes, and that shit ton that is circumstantial to you, will have the actual official statement added to it on Monday. Although, you think Trump will just post it on twitter Friday night?

[TZucchini]

that "shit ton" is purely circumstantial

You say that as if circumstantial evidence is a bad thing.

Circumstantial means "pointing indirectly toward someone's guilt but not conclusively proving it". That's literally what I just said in my post.

It's difficult to provide 100% proof when doing intelligence assessments. But the evidence that we do have, publicly available, is fairly damning.

[Dug]

The President elect is publicly questioning intelligence officers within the Federal Government, while praising Putin and Assange.

Do you think Russia has succeeded in making America look weak?

Depends on what Donny boy does if this evidence comes to light.

[Felya]

And the difference between that and the US doing is? I see no difference at all from the US installing puppets in other countries, but when it happens to the good old righteous USA, THEN ITS WAR AND BULLSHIT AND PEOPLE WILL DIE!!

Are you from Scotland? Have you heard of William Wallace?

[Deleted]

Thats what you get for hacking every major leader of the world. What goes around comes around.

[Crispin]

Well I mean the motive is pretty clear. He views Trump as a weak leader that he can walk all over. I'm inclined to agree but dudes also mad unpredictable so it can come back to bite Putin.

This is going to be the most interesting part.

Does Putin really plan on keeping Trump in control, by complimenting him like they are lovers? It's Putins only card to play, Russia is a dwarf compared to the US in other diplomatic aspects, and Trump will be very aware of this, the day their bromance ends.

At that point, Putin probably would have prefered a Hillary over Trump, even tho she despises Putin, she is far more predictable. Trump with the Republican party can wreck havoc on Russia if he wishes, Trump is in every aspect, a leader we'd hate to see lead Russia, while Putin is unpredictable, he does not appear reckless as Trump does.

It's a risky game Russia is playing, Putin really decided to go all in.


With any luck (for everyone), Trump will fuck up and grab some intern by the pu**y and we'll have someone abit less crazy steering the US.

[Kiri]

Depends on what Donny boy does if this evidence comes to light.

Didn't Donny boy want to give us some amazing insight on the topic like....yesterday?

[Felya]

This is going to be the most interesting part.

Does Putin really plan on keeping Trump in control, by complimenting him like they are lovers? It's Putins only card to play, Russia is a dwarf compared to the US in other diplomatic aspects, and Trump will be very aware of this, the day their bromance ends.

At that point, Putin probably would have prefered a Hillary over Trump, even tho she despises Putin, she is far more predictable. Trump with the Republican party can wreck havoc on Russia if he wishes, Trump is in every aspect, a leader we'd hate to see lead Russia, while Putin is unpredictable, he does not appear reckless as Trump does.

It's a risky game Russia is playing, Putin really decided to go all in.

This is way too much machinations and conspiracy. Russia has an economic dependence on fossil fuels. Trump and Hillary were opposite in this regard, with Trump doubling down and Hillary going reusable energy. Trump won and has appointed a CEO of Exxon, whose credentials are deep in Russian fossil fuel trade. Now the largest consumer of fossil fuel in the form of US, is set to double down on it, after a year + of falling prices due to production being above consumer demand.

That's it... no Machiavelli... just business...

[Dextroden]

I think we need to understand the difference between evidence and proof. In terms of intelligence gathering, I think it's impossible to provide 100% incontrovertible proof that Russian state actors were responsible for the email hacks. It's why we make assessments based on the available evidence.

Is there evidence? Yes. There's a shit ton that's publicly available. I'm sure there's a lot more that will remain classified (as it should).

Oh. So nothing has changed and this gets to be Trump's version of the email scandal.

Last I checked, both of them had "evidence" from intelligence communities. And both are still out of jail with no trial in sight.

[Dug]

With any luck (for everyone), Trump will fuck up and grab some intern by the pu**y and we'll have someone abit less crazy steering the US.

With Pence next in line it's not that much of an improvement but at least he's pretty vanilla Republican.

[Felya]

With any luck (for everyone), Trump will fuck up and grab some intern by the pu**y and we'll have someone abit less crazy steering the US.

This part I disagree with, when it comes to anti-Trump rhetoric. Think about what it means if he fucks up. I personally hope he succeeded and I'm either wrong or there are enough people to pressure him away from fucking up. I wouldn't talking about his appointments or ties to Russia or conflicts of interest, if I wanted failure. I'd let it play out and then just dance around, pointing at his supporters screaming 'you failed, get over it'... It's not why I care...

[TZucchini]

Oh. So nothing has changed and this gets to be Trump's version of the email scandal.

Last I checked, both of them had "evidence" from intelligence communities. And both are still out of jail with no trial in sight.

Perhaps you didn't read the article. A lot has changed. The countries top intelligence official went on the record, implicating Russia in not only hacking emails, but disseminating fake news and other propaganda, in an attempt to interfere with our election process.