Trump knew about hacked emails in advance

[Mormolyce]

Trump claimed he knew about damaging Clinton emails in advance
Witnesses in Mueller report say Trump discussed possibility of upcoming releases of hacked emails

Donald Trump claimed to know in advance about the publication on the WikiLeaks website of hacked documents damaging to his opponent Hillary Clinton, according to the Mueller report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.

The report by former FBI director Robert Mueller restates the finding by US intelligence that emails stolen from Democratic party organisations and the Clinton campaign chair, John Podesta, had been hacked by Russian military intelligence, the GRU, and provided to WikiLeaks through two online personas, DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0.

It showed that Trump showed a keen interest in future revelations after WikiLeaks published the first batch of stolen documents in July of that year.

The report quotes Rick Gates, the former deputy chairman of the Trump campaign, as saying that “by the late summer of 2016, the Trump campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks”.

The relevant section of the report has been heavily redacted by the justice department but one partially retained sentence says: “… while Trump and Gates were driving to LaGuardia Airport, [redacted], shortly after the call candidate Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming.”

The report also states: “Within the Trump campaign, aides reacted with enthusiasm to reports of the hacks. Some witnesses said that Trump himself discussed the possibility of upcoming releases.”

It also says Mueller’s office “cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016”.

Mueller’s investigation does not say that Trump knew the WikiLeaks publications had been provided by Russian intelligence, but does point to unexplained coincidences and gaps in what the investigators were able to discover.

It notes Trump’s public appeal to Moscow at a rally on 27 July 2016, asking for help in obtaining Clinton’s emails. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said, in a reference to emails reported to have been stored on a personal server Clinton had used while secretary of state.

The report says: “Within approximately 5 hours of Trump’s statement, GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton’s personal office.” Mueller’s office found that the GRU sent computer malware hidden in links in emails to 15 accounts in Clinton’s personal office.

“The investigation did not find evidence of earlier GRU attempts to compromise accounts hosted on this domain,” the report says, adding: “It is unclear how the GRU was able to identify these email accounts, which were not public.”

The report confirms direct messages on Twitter exchanged by the president’s son, Donald Jr, and a WikiLeaks account. In one message on 12 October, WikiLeaks thanks him and his father for “talking about our publications”, and encourages them to use a link to their archive of hacked emails which would help Trump in “digging through” the emails. Two days later, the report said, Donald Jr tweeted the link.

In the last month of the campaign, Trump mentioned WikiLeaks 164 times. But asked for his reaction to the arrest last week in London of the group’s founder, Julian Assange, he told reporters: “I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing.”

The report does not say whether Assange was aware that DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 were being run by Russian military intelligence. But the report alleges that Assange tried to cover-up the source of the hacked material by hinting it had come from Seth Rich, a former Democratic party staffer who was shot dead in Washington in July 2016.

Right-wing activists in the US have circulated suggestions, with no basis in fact, that Rich was a whistleblower who had been murdered for giving away party secrets.

The Mueller report said it was able to identify “when the GRU (operating through its personas Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks) transferred some of the stolen documents to WikiLeaks”, and it publishes communications between Assange and DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 offering to coordinate the leak of the hacked documents.

It also confirms the US intelligence view of the extensive scale and reach of the covert Russian effort to skew the 2016 election, a finding that Trump has frequently called into question. “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion,” the report states.

There was no immediate reaction from the Kremlin to the report, but Russian state TV described the Mueller investigation in terms that echoed Republican talking points: “Two years of work and tens of millions of dollars wasted.”

Leonid Slutsky, the head of the Russian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, said the allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 elections were “absurd” and part of an “internal political struggle in Washington”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ils-in-advance

Totally clears the President, thank you.

[Dontrike]

Well golly gee, who saw this coming? Was it everyone, 'cause I think it was everyone.

Seriously anyone that still backs Trump is 100% for corruption and doesn't get any leeway when the next president screws up, even a little.

[jameswhitef]

Well golly gee, who saw this coming? Was it everyone, 'cause I think it was everyone.

Seriously anyone that still backs Trump is 100% for corruption and doesn't get any leeway when the next president screws up, even a little.

I don't think so..i mean it's a big rumor and if you can tolerate this fact then you can tolerate anything in the world...

[Pipebomb]

"Trump knew about hacked emails in advance"

Maybe because Wikileaks were teasing the release of the stolen documents? I knew about an upcoming leak in advance too...

[Mayhem]

"Trump knew about hacked emails in advance"

Maybe because Wikileaks were teasing the release of the stolen documents? I knew about an upcoming leak in advance too...

Was this the wikileaks he loves or the wikileaks he knows nothing about?

[VanishingAct]

Imagine believing what the guardian journalists say. Only people who believe them are the same ones that think Trump colluded with Putin. They hate Trump, most of them hate themselves and America in general.

[dippinsawse]

Seriously, this shit is getting embarrassing. You people look so insane and obsessed. The report talks about how Trump knew about the leaks when everyone else knew about them and somehow that means he colluded? It says late summer (so after the leaks already happened) they talked about using them for their campaign which...duh, of course they did.

Also the DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 were debunked as fake years ago. They didn't "leak" anything until well after wikileaks' releases which they obviously just copied and then released with alterations that didn't exist in the wikileaks releases clearly trying to make it look like the leaks were fake in and attempt to discredit wikileaks or get attention and then said, "Hey we're the russian hackers that stole the emails". Then they tried to get media attention after doing nothing and dcleaks went on to release other old leaks and doctored them and claimed they were the source and those emails had nothing to do with the DNC or the election or any of the actual leaks happening. And none of the russian indictments were even connected to dcleaks or guccifer 2.0, they were just generic names for suspected russian intel operatives in russia. THey had zero evidence of actual links for dcleaks or guccifer 2.0 to the GRU, they literally just went, "Well this *seems* like how the GRU operates and the DNC said they noticed someone using a russian keyboard entering their server base so obviously it was the russians who hacked the dnc"....

For the report to try to support its beliefs that the russians were involved using those as evidence and without providing any actual proof is pathetic. But that is nothing new, the original report on collusion years ago already thought we were stupid enough to believe that idiotic narrative that russian hackers would be stupid enough to use cyrillic keyboards and operate at standard russian hours and leave a fat, juicy, cyber trail of breadcrumbs that makes it look like russians did it when they could have instead hacked it to make it look like china did it or make it untraceable. It is extremely easy to not do that if they actually hacked anything. Sadly enough people are apparently dumb and uninformed about hacking enough to believe the russians would actually go out of their way to make it look like russians did it.

And people honestly think the russians would watch trump on stage saying they should find the rest of hillary's emails and then try to acquire them 5 hours later...AFTER IT WAS WELL KNOWN THAT THEY WERE ALREADY DELETED? Yeah, totally not another fake attempt to attribute something that makes no sense to the russians for the DNC's narrative. Just like the fake russian bots roy moore thing. Just ignore the fact that all of these cyber security firms claiming they had evidence of russian hackers were on the DNC dime and the FBI wasn't even allowed to look at the servers.

[Mormolyce]

"Trump knew about hacked emails in advance"

Maybe because Wikileaks were teasing the release of the stolen documents? I knew about an upcoming leak in advance too...

Wikileaks released:
(Source: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf)

A) "Clinton-emails" (released 16 Mar 2016) - this wasn't an actual leak, they got this info from FOIA requests. They were fishing, hoping "someone" would send them real leaks:




B) DNC leaks (released 22 Jul 2016) - Wikileaks published 20,000 emails they'd been given by Russian intelligence. They'd been in contact since early June and thus were able to advertise this leak in advance:




C) Podesta emails (released 7 Oct 2016, 30 minutes after the Access Hollywood tape went public) - this was based on a separate spearphishing attack, conducted by the GRU way back in March and obviously kept on hand in case they needed to create a distraction.




You see, these comments come between B) and C). That's why the article notes "more releases". Ie, it's implying that Trump had foreknowledge of the Podesta leaks, not the DNC leaks which had already happened.

[Orbitus]

Imagine believing what the guardian journalists say. Only people who believe them are the same ones that think Trump colluded with Putin. They hate Trump, most of them hate themselves and America in general.

Imagine having your head shoved so far into the fucking ground that you can see China?

[Mormolyce]

Also the DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 were debunked as fake years ago.

False.







Of course, we already knew this, because Mueller indicted the IRA over it.

Seriously, go have a read: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

- - - Updated - - -

Imagine believing what the guardian journalists say.

This is straight from the Mueller report. Page 54.


https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Look at all them redactions lol.

[dippinsawse]

False.







Of course, we already knew this, because Mueller indicted the IRA over it.

Seriously, go have a read: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

- - - Updated - - -



This is straight from the Mueller report. Page 54.


https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf

Look at all them redactions lol.

Nothing you linked refutes what I said. Where is the part where it says either of these fake hacker groups were proven to have hacked anything? Where is the evidence of them being linked to russia? It specifically says they DID NOT hack the DNC or podesta or any of wikileaks' releases yet that is somehow still attributed to russia and wikileaks despite how that literally makes no sense by their own investigation. And the things they did release conveniently lacks the important facts that they were altered and were already previously leaked...Not only did they not hack the DNC but the leaks they did have weren't even legit either. Hahaha and these super leet hackers then try to DM wikileaks like hey bros we're super cool hacker dudes like you let's be friends [so we can then pretend we are in bed with you for that collusion investigation we are about to try to bring against you and trump]. It's so transparent its sad.

And honestly who is that stupid to think that is evidence of being connected to russia? Some russian server was accessed, no one knows who did it because you can't actually legitimately know that but they are full of shit and say it was a GRU officer with no proof or way of knowing unless they themselves spied on russia which would totally invalidate any right to be upset about this if russia was involved which they weren't. But anyway, from that server access which anyone in the world could have spoofed and the FBI wouldn't be able to tell one way or the other let alone know who was sitting behind the fucking computer doing that, they searched certain terms. Okay. And then guccifer 2.0 without actually leaking anything conveniently tried to attribute credit for the "hacks" using similar words that had just been searched. Uhhh if that was russia, why would they do that? What were they searching if for if they were the ones who hacked it? It doesn't make sense. But uh sure. Even if it did make sense none of that is anything remotely resembling evidence of anything being claimed let alone hacking things they didn't even release.

The FBI legitimately thinks we are braindead and you guys are proving them right.

[Shalcker]

It also says Mueller’s office “cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016”.

Wait, they are saying they cannot rule out "insider thumb drive" version of DNC hack -> Wikileaks rather then GRU?

Interesting.

[Orbitus]

It also says Mueller’s office “cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016”.

Wait, they are saying they cannot rule out "insider thumb drive" version of DNC hack -> Wikileaks rather then GRU?

Interesting.

Oh, hey, pushing that fucking conspiracy theory? We KNOW it was a hack. We KNOW it was the GRU, fucking Mueller spells it out for you.

[Shalcker]

Oh, hey, pushing that fucking conspiracy theory? We KNOW it was a hack. We KNOW it was the GRU, fucking Mueller spells it out for you.

And yet FBI cannot rule out other sources.

Apparently you know better then FBI.

[Orbitus]

And yet FBI cannot rule out other sources.

Apparently you know better then FBI.

It says it right in the Mueller report, that the GRU hacked the DNC. He wouldn't have indicted several Russians if it was someone else. Jesus fucking Christ. I guess I can see you got your marching orders and talking points.

[Shalcker]

It says it right in the Mueller report, that the GRU hacked the DNC.

GRU hack doesn't rule out thumb drive at all though, it's not like GRU blocked all thumb drives from working.

"cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016" - do you think this speaks about GRU operatives visiting Assange or what?

[Orbitus]

GRU hack doesn't rule out thumb drive at all though, it's not like GRU blocked all thumb drives from working.

"cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016" - do you think this speaks about GRU operatives visiting Assange or what?

Yeah, bullshit.

[Shalcker]

Yeah, bullshit.

Your word against FBI who don't rule it out.

Yeah, i'm pretty sure who is more trustworthy here.

[Orbitus]

Your word against FBI who don't rule it out.

Yeah, i'm pretty sure who is more trustworthy here.

Definitely not you. Time for more turnips?

[Shalcker]

Definitely not you. Time for more turnips?

Your denial of FBI work is amusing, but counter-productive.