Summations Only

At least I'm not frantically piling on - piling on - piling on.I don't have near enough time tonight to sort through all this, including the links, and determine what, if anything, is worth responding to. I'll try to get to it this weekend. But I will touch on one glaring, wide open area tonight, that maybe you could work on filling before this weekend. I've seen that very basic claim, and that's all. I've been watching around, (as my time allows) to see some DETAIL on just how Putin and the rest of the Russian politics believes their society would benefit from a Trump presidency over a Hillary presidency.The Russian and U.S. relationship can still be somewhat strained, but it's nowhere near the dangerous level it was during...the Reagan administration for example. So the first question would be, does Putin desire a stronger, or weaker U.S.?He could feel that a stronger U.S. could benefit his economy, with more efficient trading of goods and services etc. as one example. In that case it would be understandable why he preferred Trump over Hillary. Or he could feel that a weaker U.S. would make his country look stronger. In that case, he would have figured, rightly so, that Trump being elected would cause great division in the U.S., as it has, considering close to half the population not accepting his presidency, as has happened. Putin knows the left in the U.S. doesn't think much of the U.S. election process, considering their constant clamoring to eliminate the Electoral College, thereby giving the ghetto voters in L.A., Chicago, and New York total control on who the president would be.If Hillary would have been elected, he knew that even those who opposed her would have accepted her election like normal, mature human beings, and the U.S. would be much more united.I would probably agree that while Putin isn't necessarily an America hater, that he did hope a Trump presidency would weaken the U.S. in some ways. He got what he wanted in many ways - I see just today that some former Obama officials have been taking the side of Iran, in it's disputes with the U.S. and this probably figures greatly in the current tensions.ForbiddenProbably no law against that, since they're Democrats.Your Mueller report link isn't specific on just where it says the Russian government "perceived it would benefit" from a Trump presidency. How about the CIA and FBI, did they just say Russia would "benefit" and not go into any detail about just what Russia was seeking? I've seen no discussion of it.I see a few more of your helpers have recently joined in - maybe you could all try to pile on so big that you could then further accuse me of "jumping around" as I try to condense it all this weekend.

A somewhat interesting question, but not relevant to the fact that Russia interfered in our election on Trump's side, and will do so again bigger and better in 2020. You're not looking very hard. Message 2940 contains the summary of two Senate reports and links to the full reports.And of course it's trivial to find much more. Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections is a report issued by DNI summarizing the conclusions of the FBI, CIA, and NSA and authorized by those agencies.

quote:

---

This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment. This document’s conclusions are identical to the highly classified assessment, but this document does not include the full supporting information, including specific intelligence on key elements of the influence campaign. Given the redactions, we made minor edits purely for readability and flow.

​

We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election. The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion.

​

...

​

Key Judgments

​

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments.

​

• We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.
• Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency.
• Further information has come to light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of Russian motivations and goals.

​

Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations”such as cyber activity”with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or “trolls.” Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin.

​

• Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major US political parties.
• We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.
• Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.
  
• Russia’s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and international audiences.

​

We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes.

​

...

​

We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election, the consistent goals of which were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign then focused on undermining her expected presidency.

---

{Emphasis in original}Want more details, read the three linked reports.It's scary to look outside that right-wing bubble, amirite?Edited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

The clear benefit to Russians is Trump lifting economic sanctions and not adding new ones.

Yes, that was a major factor. I think they also preferred an illiterate ignorant egomaniac who's easily manipulated over an experienced and knowledgeable professional.

As I recall, one of Trump's first acts was to lift all Russian sanctions, whereupon the GOP-controlled Congress passed a bill to bar him from doing that. It passed by such an overwhelming majority as to make it veto-proof, so Trump had no choice but to sign it albeit under protest.And of course there's also meeting Russian officials in the Oval Office with no other American present and handing them classified information -- it was the Russians who leaked that. And multiple meetings and phone conversations with Putin with no other American present (except for at least one exception, an interpreter whose notes Trump took away from her so as to leave no record). Whatever they talked about or agreed on, Trump didn't tell his own staff -- the only way we found out any of it was from what the Russians said and from intelligence our agencies gathered through their surveillance of the Russians.For past administrations, one of the essential jobs on the White House staff is the archivist/recorder who maintains a transcript of all conversations the President has, for the record. That was one of the first jobs that Trump eliminated. Along with the White House visitor log detailing everyone who comes to see the President.

It is worth mentioning that Clinton had a long history of being anti-Putin, so it isn't surprising that Putin would support someone running against her. Trump being an easily manipulated fool is just a bonus.

In espionage, the ways to recruit an asset (from double agent all the way down to useful iddiot (UI) ) is summarized with the acronym, MICE, which translates to any of four meanings (all of which link to Wikipedia's page, Motives for spying): Trump has no ideology and he is too eagerly willing a lapdog for Putin to be subject to coercion or extortion (ie, we see no evidence of resentment). So in descending order his most likely motives are money, ego, and compromise -- compromise would rank very low as a motive, but Trump is very obviously compromised.Edited by dwise1, : Circumvent text munging of meaning of "UI"Edited by dwise1, : not "any for four meanings"

He definitely doesn't want any record of his interactions with Russians. Illegal, sure, but IOIYAR.

JonF has already answered your question about why Russia interfered in support of a Trump presidency, but regardless of their motivation there is no doubt they did it.By the way, Forbidden is a conservative conspiracy-nonsense website and is in no way affiliated with ABC News, business or otherwise.--Percy

Message 2958 reminds us that suspension of sanctions, in particular the Magnitsky Act were a large portion of what Russia wanted.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

It's hard to keep up with everything in Trump-land, but this opinion piece from the Washington Post provides a pretty good summary of recent events (Trump demands subservience and gets incompetence):

quote:

---

The Trump administration, if you haven’t noticed, is undergoing one of its frequent paroxysms of incompetence.

​

On the border, the administration holds hundreds of migrant children in deplorable conditions: filthy, frightened and hungry. The president ordered and then called off a massive immigration raid, and, in the middle of the chaos, the administration’s top border security official resigned Tuesday.

​

Overseas, the administration is stumbling toward war with Iran, ordering and then canceling an attack. Iran on Tuesday said the White House is “afflicted by mental retardation,” and Trump responded by threatening Iran with “obliteration.”

​

Here in Washington, Trump just appointed a new press secretary for the third time and a White House communications director for the seventh time. He refuses to say whether he has confidence in his FBI director, his third, and he’s publicly feuding with the Federal Reserve chairman he appointed over whether Trump can fire him. Meantime, Trump is defying a Trump-appointed watchdog who called for the firing of White House counselor Kellyanne Conway for illegal political activities, and he’s brushing off the latest credible accusation of sexual misconduct by saying the accuser is “not my type.” And Trump’s protocol chief is quitting on the eve of the Group of 20 summit, Bloomberg News reported Tuesday, amid allegations that he carried a whip in the office.

---

--Percy

Kellyanne Conway has been charged with Hatch Act violations, Here is the letter and the investigative report from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel about Kellyanne Conway's violation of the Hatch act, which prohibits partisan political activity on the part of civilian federal employees while carrying out their official duties. It is long and detailed, but it is worth reading at least the first few pages to see just how egregious Conway's violations are.Anyone who's seen Conway interviewed is already familiar with her partisan never-take-a-breath attack-dog style, but whatever one's style, it violates the Hatch Act if it's politically partisan. Some excerpts, first from the letter:

quote:

---

Since at least February 1, 2019, Ms. Conway has repeatedly violated the Hatch Act during her official media appearances by making statements directed at the success or your reelection campaign or at the failure of candidates for the Democratic Party's nomination for President. In doing so she has used her official authority to advocate for or against declared candidates for partisan political office. OSZ has given Ms. Conway multiple opportunities to come into compliance with the Hatch Act. Ms. Conway has ignored OSC's requests. To make matters worse, Ms. Conway is a repeat offender, whose violations detailed in the attached report are similar to those identified and referred to you in OSC's March 6, 2018 report. As with the prior case, OSC also offered Ms. Conway an opportunity to respond to this report. In both instances, however, she declined to do so.
...
Therefore, OSC respectfully requests that Ms. Conway be held to the same standards as all other federal employees, and, as such, you find removal from federal service to be the appropriate disciplinary action.

---

Now a couple brief quotes from the report itself:

quote:

---

In a May 29, 2019 interview, Ms. Kellyanne Conway, Counselor to the President, reportedly scoffed at her responsibilities under the Hatch Act and ridiculed its enforcement by asserting, “Let me know when the jail sentence starts.” Her defiant attitude is inimical to the law, and her continued pattern of misconduct is unacceptable. The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) calls on President Donald J. Trump to remove Ms. Conway from her federal position immediately.
...
Ms. Conway’s advocacy against the Democratic candidates and open endorsement of the President’s reelection effort during both official media appearances and on her Twitter account constitute prohibited political activity under the Hatch Act. Accordingly, she repeatedly continues to violate the law.

---

--Percy

DOJ urges definitive ruling from SCOTUS on census citizenship question

quote:

---

In a two-page letter to the high court, Solicitor General Noel Francisco essentially invited the justices to shut down the pending lawsuits by declaring that Ross’ decision was lawful and that further inquiry into the motives for the decision is unnecessary.

​

“The Fourth Circuit’s order underscores the need for this court to address the equal-protection claim and the immateriality of the Hofeller files in its disposition of the above-captioned case so that the lawfulness of the secretary’s decision can be fully and finally resolved,” Francisco wrote. He said the government needs a quick and clear decision by the end of this month in order to finalize the print version of the census forms for use next year.

​

However, late Tuesday night, civil rights groups fired back in a letter to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Trump administration is trying to short-circuit the normal judicial process by having the justices rule on something that hasn’t been formally presented to them.

​

“The Solicitor General’s request would require this Court to render an improper advisory opinion on issues that have not been briefed or argued before this Court, relating to cases that are not before this Court, based on a trial record that is not before this Court,” wrote Denise Hulett of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, or MALDEF, and Niyati Shah of Asian Americans Advancing Justice.

​

They also disputed the government’s claims of urgency, noting that the Census Bureau’s chief scientist testified that with additional resources the questionnaire could be finalized as late as October.

---

(emphasis added)

Heh. I just added a comment about this to the gerrymand/voter suppression thread. Added by edit:It's a long comment. I was worried someone else would beat me to it while I was writing it.Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.

I take this to mean that he would indeed rape a woman who "is his type."