Former AG Makes Good Case that Russian Hacking Was Not Meant to Elect Trump

[mikegriffith1]

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey recently wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal that made some very logical arguments to support the idea that the Russian hacking and leaking was not meant to elect Trump but was meant to serve as a warning to Hillary. Mukasey argues, probably correctly, that the Russians, like most everyone else, believed that Hillary was going to win. Therefore, says Mukasey, they meddled and leaked in order to warn Hillary that they might have her e-mails, including some/all of her missing e-mails. An excerpt:

“Consider the Justice Department inspector general's report on the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of an unauthorized and vulnerable email server,” Mukasey wrote. “It found that the bureau had concluded the server could well have been penetrated without detection. Recall also that some of the people hacked by GRU [Russia’s military intelligence agency] agents were aware of that server and mentioned it in messages they sent, so that the Russians too were aware of it.”

Mukasey added: “There are some 30,000 emails that Mrs. Clinton did not turn over, on the claim that they were personal and involved such trivia as yoga routines and Chelsea's wedding. If they instead contained damaging information -- say, regarding Clinton Foundation fundraising -- the new president would have taken office in the shadow of a sword dangling from a string held by the Russians.”

Pointing to the indictment last week of 12 GRU agents, the former attorney general also suggested that Putin wanted U.S. intelligence services to discover Russian meddling in the election -- and that if he really wanted agents from Moscow to go undetected he would have used a far more capable source than the former Russian “special-forces types” that make up GRU. (Russian meddling in election meant as 'warning' to Clinton, former AG says)​

This makes a lot of sense.

 

[John Shaw]

What Putin Really Wants

According to this article, which I found very interesting, the whole thing was done much more haphazardly and in the moment than is commonly perceived.

Putin is portrayed more realistically, and not as a criminal mastermind.

 

[Slade3200]

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey recently wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal that made some very logical arguments to support the idea that the Russian hacking and leaking was not meant to elect Trump but was meant to serve as a warning to Hillary. Mukasey argues, probably correctly, that the Russians, like most everyone else, believed that Hillary was going to win. Therefore, says Mukasey, they meddled and leaked in order to warn Hillary that they might have her e-mails, including some/all of her missing e-mails. An excerpt:

“Consider the Justice Department inspector general's report on the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of an unauthorized and vulnerable email server,” Mukasey wrote. “It found that the bureau had concluded the server could well have been penetrated without detection. Recall also that some of the people hacked by GRU [Russia’s military intelligence agency] agents were aware of that server and mentioned it in messages they sent, so that the Russians too were aware of it.”

Mukasey added: “There are some 30,000 emails that Mrs. Clinton did not turn over, on the claim that they were personal and involved such trivia as yoga routines and Chelsea's wedding. If they instead contained damaging information -- say, regarding Clinton Foundation fundraising -- the new president would have taken office in the shadow of a sword dangling from a string held by the Russians.”

Pointing to the indictment last week of 12 GRU agents, the former attorney general also suggested that Putin wanted U.S. intelligence services to discover Russian meddling in the election -- and that if he really wanted agents from Moscow to go undetected he would have used a far more capable source than the former Russian “special-forces types” that make up GRU. (Russian meddling in election meant as 'warning' to Clinton, former AG says)​

This makes a lot of sense.

At this point does it really matter what it was meant for?

 

[Nova78]

Question remains why that bag of hot air Hillary still walking around free ?

 

[K9Buck]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

 

[Slade3200]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

 

[K9Buck]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

 

[task0778]

From John Shaw's link:


In the spring of 2016, an international consortium of journalists began publishing revelations from a vast trove of documents belonging to a Panamanian law firm that specialized in helping its wealthy foreign clients move money, some of it ill-gotten, out of their home countries and away from the prying eyes of tax collectors. (The firm has denied any wrongdoing.) The documents revealed that Putin’s old friend Sergei Roldugin, a cellist and the godfather to Putin’s elder daughter, had his name on funds worth some $2 billion. It was an implausible fortune for a little-known musician, and the journalists showed that these funds were likely a piggy bank for Putin’s inner circle. Roldugin has denied any wrongdoing, but the Kremlin was furious about the revelation. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, whose wife was also implicated, angrily ascribed the reporting to “many former State Department and CIA employees” and to an effort to “destabilize” Russia ahead of its September 2016 parliamentary elections.

The argument was cynical, but it revealed a certain logic: The financial privacy of Russia’s leaders was on par with the sovereignty of Russia’s elections. “The Panama Papers were a personal slight to Putin,” says John Sipher, a former deputy of the CIA’s Russia desk. “They think we did it.” Putin’s inner circle, Soldatov says, felt “they had to respond somehow.” According to Soldatov’s reporting, on April 8, 2016, Putin convened an urgent meeting of his national-security council; all but two of the eight people there were veterans of the KGB. Given the secrecy and timing of this meeting, Soldatov believes it was then that Putin gave the signal to retaliate.

The original aim was to embarrass and damage Hillary Clinton, to sow dissension, and to show that American democracy is just as corrupt as Russia’s, if not worse. “No one believed in Trump, not even a little bit,” Soldatov says. “It was a series of tactical operations. At each moment, the people who were doing this were filled with excitement over how well it was going, and that success pushed them to go even further.”

“A lot of what they’ve done was very opportunistic,” says Dmitri Alperovitch, the Russian-born co-founder of the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which first discovered the Russian interference after the company was hired to investigate the hack of the Democratic National Committee servers in May 2016. “They cast a wide net without knowing in advance what the benefit might be.” The Russian hackers were very skilled, Alperovitch says, but “we shouldn’t try to make them out to be eight feet tall” and able to “elect whomever they want. They tried in Ukraine, and it didn’t work.” Nor did it work in the French elections of 2017.


This sounds right to me, or at least plausible. If you screw with Putin he'll screw you back and I think that's what happened.

 

[Slade3200]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

 

[BluesLegend]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

No need, the surviving Russians would be in GITMO

 

[K9Buck]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

I don't believe a special counsel was needed to investigate Russian espionage activities against the DNC server. The Russians have been hacking American government servers and the servers of private organizations for many years.

My take is that Rosenstein and Sessions are both never-Trumpers and are happy to see Mueller, Strozk, etc. dig up anything they can on Trump to warrant prosecuting him or getting him impeached. I certainly don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin to do anything.

What are your thoughts?

 

[John Shaw]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

I don't believe a special counsel was needed to investigate Russian espionage activities against the DNC server. The Russians have been hacking American government servers and the servers of private organizations for many years.

My take is that Rosenstein and Sessions are both never-Trumpers and are happy to see Mueller, Strozk, etc. dig up anything they can on Trump to warrant prosecuting him or getting him impeached. I certainly don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin to do anything.

What are your thoughts?

Sessions was an early Trump supporter. Obviously not a Never-Trumper.

Now, maybe Sessions is less favorable toward the president, but that's because Trump has been trying to humiliate him regularly for almost 2 years.

 

[task0778]

From John Shaw's link:


In the spring of 2016, an international consortium of journalists began publishing revelations from a vast trove of documents belonging to a Panamanian law firm that specialized in helping its wealthy foreign clients move money, some of it ill-gotten, out of their home countries and away from the prying eyes of tax collectors. (The firm has denied any wrongdoing.) The documents revealed that Putin’s old friend Sergei Roldugin, a cellist and the godfather to Putin’s elder daughter, had his name on funds worth some $2 billion. It was an implausible fortune for a little-known musician, and the journalists showed that these funds were likely a piggy bank for Putin’s inner circle. Roldugin has denied any wrongdoing, but the Kremlin was furious about the revelation. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, whose wife was also implicated, angrily ascribed the reporting to “many former State Department and CIA employees” and to an effort to “destabilize” Russia ahead of its September 2016 parliamentary elections.

The argument was cynical, but it revealed a certain logic: The financial privacy of Russia’s leaders was on par with the sovereignty of Russia’s elections. “The Panama Papers were a personal slight to Putin,” says John Sipher, a former deputy of the CIA’s Russia desk. “They think we did it.” Putin’s inner circle, Soldatov says, felt “they had to respond somehow.” According to Soldatov’s reporting, on April 8, 2016, Putin convened an urgent meeting of his national-security council; all but two of the eight people there were veterans of the KGB. Given the secrecy and timing of this meeting, Soldatov believes it was then that Putin gave the signal to retaliate.

The original aim was to embarrass and damage Hillary Clinton, to sow dissension, and to show that American democracy is just as corrupt as Russia’s, if not worse. “No one believed in Trump, not even a little bit,” Soldatov says. “It was a series of tactical operations. At each moment, the people who were doing this were filled with excitement over how well it was going, and that success pushed them to go even further.”

“A lot of what they’ve done was very opportunistic,” says Dmitri Alperovitch, the Russian-born co-founder of the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which first discovered the Russian interference after the company was hired to investigate the hack of the Democratic National Committee servers in May 2016. “They cast a wide net without knowing in advance what the benefit might be.” The Russian hackers were very skilled, Alperovitch says, but “we shouldn’t try to make them out to be eight feet tall” and able to “elect whomever they want. They tried in Ukraine, and it didn’t work.” Nor did it work in the French elections of 2017.


This sounds right to me, or at least plausible. If you screw with Putin he'll screw you back and I think that's what happened.

The other thing is, the Russians also tried to hack the GOP, but failed. Look at that part that emboldened, they were ordered to hit back at Clinton but also to screw with our democratic system and show it was just as corrupt as Russia's. But here's the thing: Trump isn't like Clinton or Obama, and I think if the Russians meddle with our 2018 elections then there's going to be payback from Trump and it'll be something that Putin does not want to happen. Obama talked big but did nothing, Trump will really do something and I think the rest of the world knows it. It may not be the best or smartest thing, like these tariff things, but he'll do something cuz that's his nature. Hit me, I'll hit back hard. All in all, maybe that ain't such a bad thing for us.

 

[Slade3200]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

I don't believe a special counsel was needed to investigate Russian espionage activities against the DNC server. The Russians have been hacking American government servers and the servers of private organizations for many years.

My take is that Rosenstein and Sessions are both never-Trumpers and are happy to see Mueller, Strozk, etc. dig up anything they can on Trump to warrant prosecuting him or getting him impeached. I certainly don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin to do anything.

What are your thoughts?

I don’t think you are seeing clearly if you think Sessions is a never trumper. It is a cop out excuse to say anybody who supports the investigation is a never Trumper.

I don’t think Trump was conspiring with Putin. But he and a handful of his team members have made several lies about contacts with Russians which leads to suspicion. We haven’t seen any of the classified intel either, but people who have, like Trumps appointeed FBI Director, Chris Wray, has and he says that it is not a witch hunt and the investigation is legit. Do you think he is a never Trumper too?

 

[task0778]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

I don't believe a special counsel was needed to investigate Russian espionage activities against the DNC server. The Russians have been hacking American government servers and the servers of private organizations for many years.

My take is that Rosenstein and Sessions are both never-Trumpers and are happy to see Mueller, Strozk, etc. dig up anything they can on Trump to warrant prosecuting him or getting him impeached. I certainly don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin to do anything.

What are your thoughts?

Sessions was an early Trump supporter. Obviously not a Never-Trumper.

Now, maybe Sessions is less favorable toward the president, but that's because Trump has been trying to humiliate him regularly for almost 2 years.

I'm having a bit of a hard time figuring out what the hell is going on with Trump and his DOJ. Holder and Lynch were hand in glove with Obama for 8 years, but that ain't the case with Trump. I gotta think there's going to be a shakeup there pretty soon if they don't finish up this Mueller thing fairly soon. Like before November, I just can't see dragging this thing on forever, either you got something by now or you don't.

 

[Slade3200]

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

I don't believe a special counsel was needed to investigate Russian espionage activities against the DNC server. The Russians have been hacking American government servers and the servers of private organizations for many years.

My take is that Rosenstein and Sessions are both never-Trumpers and are happy to see Mueller, Strozk, etc. dig up anything they can on Trump to warrant prosecuting him or getting him impeached. I certainly don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin to do anything.

What are your thoughts?

Sessions was an early Trump supporter. Obviously not a Never-Trumper.

Now, maybe Sessions is less favorable toward the president, but that's because Trump has been trying to humiliate him regularly for almost 2 years.

I'm having a bit of a hard time figuring out what the hell is going on with Trump and his DOJ. Holder and Lynch were hand in glove with Obama for 8 years, but that ain't the case with Trump. I gotta think there's going to be a shakeup there pretty soon if they don't finish up this Mueller thing fairly soon. Like before November, I just can't see dragging this thing on forever, either you got something by now or you don't.

I agree that the investigation is dragging... but they have been making indictments so it is also producing. They obviously have more to come

 

[HaShev]

When all is said and done, our Gov't has allowed Google to have more compromising emails and data then any country like Russia or China, through allowing them to be intrusive in every possible manner left virtually unchecked.
NOT ONLY THAT BUT, they owe us hours upon hours of our lives waiting on google analytics delaying and erroring out page loads.
Talk about compromising info, Google has it all to compromise anyone in any position, including Putin. *L*

Below DNC hackers amuse themselves reading Hillary's emails.

 

[K9Buck]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

Who appointed the special counsel?

The deputy AG that Trump appointed.

What does that tell you?

I don't believe a special counsel was needed to investigate Russian espionage activities against the DNC server. The Russians have been hacking American government servers and the servers of private organizations for many years.

My take is that Rosenstein and Sessions are both never-Trumpers and are happy to see Mueller, Strozk, etc. dig up anything they can on Trump to warrant prosecuting him or getting him impeached. I certainly don't believe that Trump conspired with Putin to do anything.

What are your thoughts?

I don’t think you are seeing clearly if you think Sessions is a never trumper. It is a cop out excuse to say anybody who supports the investigation is a never Trumper.

I don’t think Trump was conspiring with Putin. But he and a handful of his team members have made several lies about contacts with Russians which leads to suspicion. We haven’t seen any of the classified intel either, but people who have, like Trumps appointeed FBI Director, Chris Wray, has and he says that it is not a witch hunt and the investigation is legit. Do you think he is a never Trumper too?

If Wray is totally objective and non-partisan, why did he wait until after Strzok's hearing to remove him from FBI headquarters? And why is Strzok still on the payroll?

Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page were all revealed as anti-Trump partisans. Why not Wray?

 

[BlackFlag]

If the Russians had hacked the server of the Tea Party, would a special counsel have been appointed? Yea, I didn't think so either.

 

[K9Buck]

I agree that the investigation is dragging... but they have been making indictments so it is also producing. They obviously have more to come

Issuing indictments against foreign intelligence agents for hacking is a first. It's long on political messaging and short on substance.

If the Germans adopted Mueller's rationale, the German government would be issuing indictments against NSA agents.