dagblog - Comments for "Ex-Spy Chief: Russia’s Election Hacking Was An ‘Intelligence Failure’"

By "hacked the election" do

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 21 Dec 2017 04:42:08 +0000

In reply to There may well be there there

By "hacked the election" do you include illegal help of one side over the other, or you only thinking breaking into voting machines?

There may well be there there

HSG — Thu, 21 Dec 2017 01:35:23 +0000

In reply to Hal... more...

There may well be there there but, as O-Kat wrote, Mueller is playing this close to the vest and the mainstream media hasn't documented evidence of a conspiracy between Russia and Trump to hack the election. Indeed, they still haven't proven that Russia hacked the election.

Hal... more...

oldenGoldenDecoy — Thu, 21 Dec 2017 01:06:25 +0000

In reply to You're right OGD. Maybe Flynn

Hal... more...

December 20, 2017 5:32 pm | Allegra Kirkland | TPM Muckraker

Does New Report On McGahn’s Flynn Concerns Bolster Obstruction Case?

Just days after the inauguration, White House Counsel Don McGahn learned—and warned President Donald Trump—that then-national security adviser Michael Flynn had probably violated federal laws, according to a new report out Wednesday.

Foreign Policy reported that the Special Counsel has obtained “records” that reveal McGahn in late January researched the consequences of lying to the FBI and of violating the Logan Act, a centuries-old federal prohibition on private citizens negotiating with hostile foreign governments. The research, conducted with the help of two aides, prompted McGahn to conclude that Flynn had likely committed a crime by discussing sanctions with a top Russian official during the transition, two current administration officials told Foreign Policy.

Most significantly, the records now in the possession of Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicate McGahn “warned Trump about Flynn’s possible violations” for holding those discussions and lying about them to the FBI, according to Foreign Policy.

Legal experts told TPM that such advance notification about Flynn’s potentially criminal acts would significantly bolster the case that the President was trying to obstruct justice when he allegedly asked then-FBI Director James Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn the day after his dismissal from the White House. The obstruction statute requires not only that someone tried to impede an investigation, but had corrupt intent in doing so.

“It basically all goes to what Trump knew when he asked Comey to let the Flynn investigation go,” former FBI counterintelligence agent Asha Rangappa told TPM.

Awareness that Flynn had committed possible federal criminal offenses “really raises the level of knowledge and of what exactly Trump was trying to essentially derail the investigation into,” Rangappa continued.

The White House and Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office did not return Foreign Policy’s requests for comment.

---------

Here's the FP link...

December 20, 2017, 12:07 PM | Murray Waas | Foreign Policy

White House Counsel Knew in January Flynn Probably Violated the Law

Don McGahn was looking at whether the national security advisor violated federal laws just days after Trump moved into the White House.

~OGD~

Almost all we have is

ocean-kat — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 22:53:23 +0000

In reply to You're right OGD. Maybe Flynn

Almost all we have is speculation because contrary to right wing claims Mueller is a straight arrow who is running a very honorable investigation. There are no leaks from his team. There's no Mark Felt feeding damaging information to a couple of rookie reporters at the WP or NYT. Or Ken Starr's investigation that leaked like a sieve because Starr had a strong partisan motivation to bring Clinton down. We'll need to wait until the investigation is over to see what went down.

Peracles... Yup don't look to

oldenGoldenDecoy — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 17:20:00 +0000

In reply to Why the hell is Morell

Peracles... Yup don't look to the mainstream media...

It's those low-level squirrels ferreting out the nuts and putting 'em in the basket...

Dec. 19, 2017 | Jackie Flynn Mogensen | MotherJones

A Groundbreaking Case May Force Controversial Data
Firm Cambridge Analytica to Reveal Trump Secrets

This US professor is counting on British data privacy laws to get some answers.

~OGD~

Why the hell is Morell

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:14:20 +0000

In reply to You're right OGD. Maybe Flynn

Why the hell is Morell talking about the mainstream press?
This is about the intelligence community, congressional committees and the special counsel.
Remember, almost everything we knew about Watergate came out of divulged grand jury testimony, etc.
If this isn't released, either publicly or as a leak, we're unlikely to know.
But we have all sorts of meetings with Russians going back to 2013 and before (even 2002), Russian relations that have been denied or described as something that they weren't - especially the Jun 9, 2016 meeting & Trump's lost weekend in 2013 where he was doing a Trump Tower Moscow deal tied to his pageant, and multiple versions of "facts" for example here and here.
Jared Kushner, Wilbur Ross, Paul Manafort , Jeff Sessions and Michael Flynn all left Russian connections off their security documents - Manafort & Flynn being charged for it already. And then there's Carter Page who's a big loudmouth goof just dripping with inadvertent inconsistencies and damaging info on others. A few others like Priebus in the mix as well.
And then Mueller now has 15,000+ emails to use to compare with sworn testimony looking for any other deviations. And at least Manafort's phone that was hacked by FISA or similar order.

There's been plenty on Cambridge Analytica tied to Wikileaks tied to Russian hackers & social media spammers, plenty on hacking DNC & DCCC & private gmail accounts (Podesta, et al)

This is not "speculation" - Papadopoulos and Flynn have already pleaded guilty, and their testimony almost certainly extends to Russian interference of US election 2016 (*not* the much more limited "Russian hacking" bit you propose). Manafort & his assistant have been charged. All roads seem to point to Rome at this ppoint - I've no clue why Morell is out pretending it doesn't, but in general the intelligence community - FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. - fucked up bigtime, so maybe some of them want to hide their shame. Bad approach. We can't afford more bullshit.

You're right OGD. Maybe Flynn

HSG — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 13:44:14 +0000

In reply to Thanks Hal... from the

You're right OGD. Maybe Flynn can testify to a conspiracy between Trump and the Russkies. Morell's point is that even with all the digging by NYT, WaPo, et al., for over a year all we have is speculation. Yes, Trump obviously wants to shut down the investigation. But that may reflect a very legitimate fear that Mueller will dig up evidence of criminal or scurrilous behavior that is wholly unrelated to the Russian hacking allegations - kinda like the Lewinsky charges that Ken Starr brought. Tax evasion or even fraud and sexual assault jump to mind.

They have found something.

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 07:35:36 +0000

In reply to Ex-Spy Chief: Russia’s Election Hacking Was An ‘Intelligence Failure’

They have found something. But if you keep your eyes closed, you're sure not to see anything.

Hey, note Congress is investigating *2* campaigns now. We know about Stein's. Wanna bet #2 is Bernie's? Grab yourself some popcorn.

Thanks Hal... from the

oldenGoldenDecoy — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 05:34:55 +0000

In reply to Ex-Spy Chief: Russia’s Election Hacking Was An ‘Intelligence Failure’

Thanks Hal... from the interview:

Morell: The fourth thing I’d say is, the obstruction of justice issue. In my view, when I read the statute, boy, it looks—you know, it looks like you could make a case. Now, the hard part is intent. Right? You have to intend to violate the statute. You have to intend to obstruct justice. That’s the difficult piece to prove here.

You need something on paper, or you need somebody who heard the president say something about what he was trying to do here, or you need him to tell you that. Right? Well, he’s not going to do that. And so, while it looks like it to all of us, that that’s what he was trying to do—you’ve got to get to that intent part, and that’s what’s hard from a criminal perspective.

The following is what we publicly know of Comey relating to Mike Flynn and the private meeting... What we and Morell don't know is what info Mueller's team has from flipping Flynn that may or may not establish intent...

Jun. 7, 2017 | Natasha Bertrand | Business Insider

Here's what James Comey will tell Congress in his first testimony since being fired

Trump asked him to drop the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn one day after Flynn was forced to resign over his conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

From Comey's full prepared Senate testimony »

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf

~OGD~