America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by DrafterX. 21 replies replies.
Easy To See The Priorities Of The DNC
DrMaddVibe Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,300
Ex-Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson: DNC and state officials dismissed Russia warnings last year


WASHINGTON — Former President Barack Obama’s secretary of homeland security says that his efforts to protect the country from Russian cyberattacks last year were twice rebuffed — first by the Democratic National Committee and then later by state election officials who feared he was plotting an unwarranted “federal takeover” of the U.S. election system.

The comments by ex-Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, made in prepared testimony for the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday, underscore the frustrations that the Obama administration had last year in dealing with a Russian state-sponsored cyberattack on the 2016 election that was far more extensive and sophisticated than was publicly realized at the time.

When he convened a conference call of state officials Aug. 15 of last year to tell them he was planning to designate the country’s election system as part of the nation’s “critical infrastructure” — a move that would have provided extensive federal cybersecurity protections similar to that given to power grids, dams and financial services — the reaction, “to my disappointment,” was “neutral to negative,” Johnson says.

“Those who expressed negative views stated that running elections in this country was the sovereign and exclusive responsibility of the states, and they did not want federal intrusion, a federal takeover or federal regulation of that process,” says Johnson. “This was a profound misunderstanding of what a critical designation would mean, which I tried to clarify for them.”

Yahoo News first reported two weeks after Johnson’s conference call that foreign hackers possibly linked to Russia had penetrated the voting registration databases of two states, Illinois and Arizona, prompting the FBI to issue a warning to state election officials throughout the country about attempted intrusions. It has since been reported that as many as 39 state systems may have been attacked.

But sources have also told Yahoo News that much of the resistance on Johnson’s conference call came from Republican secretaries of state who suspected a partisan motive in the Obama administration’s efforts to bolster cybersecurity protections of state voting systems.

The resistance caused Johnson and top Homeland Security officials to conclude that making the critical infrastructure designation during the election season would be “counterproductive” and he put the idea “on the back burner,” the former secretary says in his testimony. (He later made the designation after the election.)

Johnson also reveals in his testimony that he got similar pushback when he offered to provide homeland security protections to the DNC after he learned about the Russian cyberattack on its computer system.

When he learned of the hack of the DNC, “I pressed my staff to know whether DHS [Department of Homeland Security] was sufficiently proactive, and on the scene helping the DNC identify the intruders and patch vulnerabilities,” Johnson says. “The answer, to the best of my recollection, was not reassuring: The FBI and the DNC had been in contact with each other months before about the intrusion, and the DNC did not feel it needed DHS’s assistance at that time.”

Just how much of a difference Johnson’s efforts would have made in protecting the DNC and state election systems is far from clear. At the time that the DHS reached out to the DNC, the Russian intrusion had already taken place and would be deemed far more serious weeks later, in mid July, when WikiLeaks began dumping internal committee emails on its website — the first clear sign that the Russians had decided to “weaponize” the material they had hacked to potentially influence American voters.

The day after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters he was unable to say whether President Trump accepted that the Russians had hacked the 2016 election, Johnson made it clear there was no doubt in his mind what had happened. Echoing the formal conclusion of the U.S. intelligence community, he says in his testimony that the Russian government “at the direction of Vladimir Putin himself” orchestrated the attacks “for the purpose of influencing our election — plain and simple.”

He also warns more broadly that “cyberattacks of all manner and from multiple sources are going to get worse before they get better” and “at this moment, those on offense have the upper hand.”



Why let a good theft go to waste?


So...anyone still blaming Trump for this dumpster fire?
DrafterX Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,505
Those Bassards..!! Mad
delta1 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
So the right now is starting to accept our intelligence agencies findings that the Russians were actively interfering with our last Presidential election...and taking the word of the leader (a black man, to boot) of one of the agencies...HALLELUJAH...progress...




Sarcasm<----(better put this in or I'm gonna get flamed...)
DrafterX Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,505
I think the Right's denial of Russian hacking was against the insinuation of Trumps collusion... And that they did manage to effect the election results.. there's a big 'No' on both of those so far... Mellow
ZRX1200 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,473
A Democrat intelligence guy says there was hacking, dems do nothing.....including the half black (non-slave blood) savior POTUS.......ARE YOU saying Soetoro was WRONG Al?

So now AFTER they lost power, they want to blame the other party and demand they do something?

Just make up your mind D's, then we'll talk.
dstieger Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
DrafterX wrote:
I think the Right's denial of Russian hacking was against the insinuation of Trumps collusion... And that they did manage to effect the election results.. there's a big 'No' on both of those so far... Mellow



And that begins to get the reason that its impossible to find a reasonable discussion about any of this. To me, there's at least four very different questions that must each must be answered...and answered, to a great degree, independent of the other three. Unfortunately, the model for noisy rhetoric today prevents such a discussion...

1. Did the Russian government take actions to (or support/endorse actions to) hack into any OFFICIAL election office/material, etc?

2. If yes, did such action have ANY effect on the outcome of any US election?

3. Did Trump, or any Trump surrogate work directly with the Russians to actually affect the election - whether to provide info to, request specific hacking targets, receive 'sensitive' info recovered by hacking, etc?

4. If the answer to previous question is yes, but not Trump, personally...did Trump know, direct, neglect to stop, etc...those actions?

I just cannot understand how the conversation gets so fucked up so quickly....."Russians wanted a certain election result>>>Russians hack stuff>>>Trump won>>>Trump musta had the Russians hack the election his way"

Part of it is probably partly because some that (still) don't 'accept' that Trump could have possibly won unless he cheated. I suppose that clouds objectivity about anything related to the election. Personally...I think that the Trump team got way too cozy with Russians prior to the election...or in their past lives...and I believe that Russia probably hacked DNC...(and probably RNC and other stuff)....but I don't think Russian actions affected the outcome of the election and I seriously doubt that Team Trump did anything truly nefarious like trying to get Russians to throw him the election. Maybe, I just have too much blind faith in our electoral processes, but it's going to take some REAL facts to convince me otherwise.
jjanecka Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
First off, it wasn't the Russians, Denmark orchestrated all of the hackings.
ZRX1200 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,473
1. Yes
2. No
3. No evidence exists at this point
4. Who knows.....we KNOW Barry did nothing when his guy was warning him WHILE it WAS happening. Which is something again one side doesn't want to discuss.
delta1 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
He's already explained on many occasions why he did nothing, except to encourage extensive intelligence gathering behind the scenes, but the right refuses to hear him, or if they somehow heard it, refuse to believe him, because he sounds so...forthright... and circumspect...and motivated by integrity...

The POTUS said that he believed that if he revealed what he knew about the Russian's interference into the election, and how they were trying to help Trump and injure Clinton (conclusions drawn by ALL of the intelligence agencies that have evidence of the Russian efforts), it would've had an effect that may have tilted the election in Clinton's favor. Any public pronouncements by POTUS would've definitely led to outrage by the right, who would've accused him of election tampering...think the Dems reaction to the Comey letters about the Clinton investigation seemed excessive???

I am saddened that some on the right are so elated that Trump won the election that they have taken an "I know nuthin... I see nuthin...I hear nuthin...I'm happy with my head in the sand" attitude towards an important issue about a hostile nation messing with our democratic process.

I believe Trump won the election, and that will never change, regardless of where the investigations lead...but to protect the autonomy of all future elections, we need to know all the facts.

I am convinced that if Clinton had won, and the same intelligence sources had data that showed Russian interference designed to help her win, the same people saying "Trump won and there's nothing there to investigate" would be CONSISTENT, saying "move along...nothing to see here...Clinton won...no need for any investigations." Right?

I hope that there are enough honest and patriotic Americans, on both sides, that want to get to the bottom of this, learn all the facts, so we can take appropriate action to prevent future hacks.
jjanecka Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
What's so bad about Russia being the only country that actually gives a chit in the first place. They knew Hillery was gonna turn this place into a commie cesspool and hand it over to the same globalists who are paying the media to destroy this country in the first place. I dunno about you but I want that kinda ally, the kind that will take matters into their own hands because it will be better for America to stay sovereign.
DrafterX Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,505
delta1 wrote:
He's already explained on many occasions why he did nothing, except to encourage extensive intelligence gathering behind the scenes, but the right refuses to hear him, or if they somehow heard it, refuse to believe him, because he sounds so...forthright... and circumspect...and motivated by integrity...

The POTUS said that he believed that if he revealed what he knew about the Russian's interference into the election, and how they were trying to help Trump and injure Clinton (conclusions drawn by ALL of the intelligence agencies that have evidence of the Russian efforts), it would've had an effect that may have tilted the election in Clinton's favor. Any public pronouncements by POTUS would've definitely led to outrage by the right, who would've accused him of election tampering...think the Dems reaction to the Comey letters about the Clinton investigation seemed excessive???

I am saddened that some on the right are so elated that Trump won the election that they have taken an "I know nuthin... I see nuthin...I hear nuthin...I'm happy with my head in the sand" attitude towards an important issue about a hostile nation messing with our democratic process.

I believe Trump won the election, and that will never change, regardless of where the investigations lead...but to protect the autonomy of all future elections, we need to know all the facts.

I am convinced that if Clinton had won, and the same intelligence sources had data that showed Russian interference designed to help her win, the same people saying "Trump won and there's nothing there to investigate" would be CONSISTENT, saying "move along...nothing to see here...Clinton won...no need for any investigations." Right?

I hope that there are enough honest and patriotic Americans, on both sides, that want to get to the bottom of this, learn all the facts, so we can take appropriate action to prevent future hacks.




but that's not what they want... they want Trump out.. they don't care who did the hacking.. they just want to tie Trump to it somehow... and if it's already been proven Russia tried to hack us why the ongoing investigation..?? Mellow
dstieger Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
jjanecka wrote:
What's so bad about Russia being the only country that actually gives a chit in the first place. They knew Hillery was gonna turn this place into a commie cesspool and hand it over to the same globalists who are paying the media to destroy this country in the first place. I dunno about you but I want that kinda ally, the kind that will take matters into their own hands because it will be better for America to stay sovereign.



I think there's a typo in there somewhere...or maybe you forgot the Sarcasm ?
Speyside Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Wow jj. That's crazy chit.
ZRX1200 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,473
Yeah, crazy Sarcasm
Speyside Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Z, I would expect no less from you.
Mr. Jones Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,357
Considering WHAT I HAVE BEEN THROUGH
OVER THE LAST 4+ YEARS. ..

AFTER I...
"SAW SOMETHING AND SAID SOMETHING"

A program inacted by JEH Johnson
and Janet Napoliano...

WHICH SHOULD BE NAMED...
"SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING, THEN WE WILL
KILL YOU"...

I WOULDN'T trust ONE WORD THAT COMES OUTTA
THAT SORRY PIECE OF SHIITS PIE HOLE...
EVER !!!
ZRX1200 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,473
Afghanistan.
Iraq.
Sudan.
Libya.
Cuba.
North Korea.
Iran.

IMF


Insert weaponized propaganda here.


They're using YOUR $ to grow and protect theirs.
delta1 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
yep...but you've consistently said that it's better to give than to receive...
Speyside Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Wouldn't disagree with any of that Z. I do disagree that Russia is our ally and the type of one we want.
jjanecka Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
Sarcasm aside. We're in a very tight spot and we need to pray for the minds currently holding office in this country to develop the best strategy that will beat down global interests who seek to exploit us.
DrafterX Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,505
when Obama gets done vacationing he's gonna rule the UN... Mellow
Users browsing this topic
Guest