Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

portlander23

(2,078 posts)
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 07:56 PM Dec 2016

Anonymous Leaks to the WashPost About the CIAs Russia Beliefs Are No Substitute for Evidence

Anonymous Leaks to the WashPost About the CIA’s Russia Beliefs Are No Substitute for Evidence
Glenn Greenwald
The Intercept

These unnamed sources told the Post that “the CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system.” The anonymous officials also claim that “intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails” from both the DNC and John Podesta’s email account. Critically, none of the actual evidence for these claims is disclosed; indeed, the CIA’s “secret assessment” itself remains concealed.

Deep down in its article, the Post notes — rather critically — that “there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.” Most importantly, the Post adds that “intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin ‘directing’ the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks.” But the purpose of both anonymous leaks is to finger the Russian government for these hacks, acting with the motive to defeat Hillary Clinton.

There is still no such evidence for any of these claims. What we have instead are assertions, disseminated by anonymous people, completely unaccompanied by any evidence, let alone proof. As a result, none of the purported evidence — still — can be publicly seen, reviewed, or discussed. Anonymous claims leaked to newspapers about what the CIA believes do not constitute proof, and certainly do not constitute reliable evidence that substitutes for actual evidence that can be reviewed. Have we really not learned this lesson yet?

Needless to say, questions about who hacked the DNC and Podesta email accounts are serious and important ones. The answers have widespread implications on many levels. That’s all the more reason these debates should be based on publicly disclosed evidence, not competing, unverifiable anonymous leaks from professional liars inside government agencies, cheered by drooling, lost partisans anxious to embrace whatever claims make them feel good, all conducted without the slightest regard for rational faculties or evidentiary requirements.


Good article from Greenwald. Of course he's not saying that Russia didn't try to affect the election, but he is right that there has been no evidence put forward that anyone could review. I think we may all want to step back from the ledge. We can't demand an new election or that electors change their votes because the CIA said so.

If there is compelling proof, the CIA should quit with the whisper campaign and the Obama administration should release something. Let's see what the investigation turns up before we lose our freaking minds.
40 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Anonymous Leaks to the WashPost About the CIAs Russia Beliefs Are No Substitute for Evidence (Original Post) portlander23 Dec 2016 OP
Glen Greenwald is not an entirely reliable source. . .n/t annabanana Dec 2016 #1
Since when? portlander23 Dec 2016 #3
You're kidding right? uponit7771 Dec 2016 #10
He/she must be. charlyvi Dec 2016 #19
Since the beginning of his "career" as a "journalist". OilemFirchen Dec 2016 #16
He's one of the few sources I trust. nt m-lekktor Dec 2016 #26
Agreed. There's a lack of memory here. enough Dec 2016 #27
No, we remember. Greenwald is a libertarian who has also pnwmom Dec 2016 #32
Yep Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Dec 2016 #36
That tells us a lot about you, pnwmom Dec 2016 #37
CBS and its sources also confirmed the report. LonePirate Dec 2016 #2
Has it been produced so people can review it? portlander23 Dec 2016 #4
thanks. . . n/t annabanana Dec 2016 #6
Glenn Greenwald? You're trying WWWAAAYYYY too hard to invalidate people's concerns. Why???? Tarheel_Dem Dec 2016 #5
kind of interesting isn't it, since Harry Reid told us about this in October still_one Dec 2016 #22
And don't forget these guys. They haven't gone away, and they're still trying to shape public..... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2016 #30
Yup still_one Dec 2016 #34
Why would anyone listen to Greenwald at this point? He's a proven liar. KittyWampus Dec 2016 #7
FUCK Greenwald !!! uponit7771 Dec 2016 #8
Fuck glenngreenwald . boston bean Dec 2016 #9
HAHAHAHA JI7 Dec 2016 #11
Greenwald hates the United States Abu Pepe Dec 2016 #12
Sounds like a Wikileak employee? kentuck Dec 2016 #13
The CIA is one of how many Charles Bukowski Dec 2016 #14
That is right, and in Octorber, Reid told us about it. still_one Dec 2016 #21
This message was self-deleted by its author Ilsa Dec 2016 #15
Oh fuck. I am a "drooling lost partisan anxious to...feel good." rzemanfl Dec 2016 #17
Agreed malaise Dec 2016 #18
F**K Greenwald. Reid told us this back in October still_one Dec 2016 #20
Have to love politics sometimes. Those strange bedfellows and all. SubjectiveLife78 Dec 2016 #23
Well then, Greenwald, name names. Barack_America Dec 2016 #24
The Intercept? blue neen Dec 2016 #25
Greenwald is a Snowden/Putin sympathizer and a Libertarian who has fought pnwmom Dec 2016 #28
I tweeted greenwald that the underthematrix Dec 2016 #29
Why do you throw water on posts triron Dec 2016 #31
Tick tock. nt JTFrog Dec 2016 #33
I couldn't agree more Takket Dec 2016 #35
Fuck Greenwald! Dr Hobbitstein Dec 2016 #38
Wow. Are we really still quoting that right wing racist ecstatic Dec 2016 #39
Bern it down,eh? Transparent. bettyellen Dec 2016 #40

charlyvi

(6,537 posts)
19. He/she must be.
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:12 PM
Dec 2016

Greenwald does not look at facts then come to an opinion. He basically forms an opinion and gathers facts to support it. He says so himself. Calls it an "adversarial" point of view. He's also misogynistic as hell, though that doesn't have anything to do with the Russian hack.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
16. Since the beginning of his "career" as a "journalist".
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:07 PM
Dec 2016

His entire miserable portfolio is rife with "anonymous sources".

Have we really not learned this lesson yet?

enough

(13,237 posts)
27. Agreed. There's a lack of memory here.
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 09:29 PM
Dec 2016

A lot of people on DU dislike Greenwald because he has been critical of Obama and Hillary. They don't seem to remember that he was one of the clearest, smartest, and most dedicated critics of GW Bush and his administration since the "election" of 2000. He was also a tireless critic of that electoral debacle.

The idea that you stop trusting a reporter because he or she says things critical of "our team" is the saddest thing I see on DU.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
32. No, we remember. Greenwald is a libertarian who has also
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 10:13 PM
Dec 2016

heavily criticized Obama and Hillary.

Libertarians believe in an economic policy that is the opposite of socialism. They aren't allies just because they opposed Bush, too.

And Greenwald was a big proponent of Snowden, who's living in Russia now, after leaking US secrets to China and Russia.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
37. That tells us a lot about you,
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 11:05 PM
Dec 2016

since he's a libertarian and the libertarian economic philosophy is the opposite of socialism.

 

portlander23

(2,078 posts)
4. Has it been produced so people can review it?
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:01 PM
Dec 2016

I'm not saying there isn't a report and not saying that Russia didn't act, but do we actually have something that can be verified?

Tarheel_Dem

(31,207 posts)
30. And don't forget these guys. They haven't gone away, and they're still trying to shape public.....
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 10:00 PM
Dec 2016

opinion in the US. 'What, Russia steal an election? Oh, that can't possibly be true.' Good luck to Angela Merkel in fighting against the Red Tide.

 

KittyWampus

(55,894 posts)
7. Why would anyone listen to Greenwald at this point? He's a proven liar.
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:01 PM
Dec 2016

And was either duped by Russia/Snowden or knowingly helped them.

Response to portlander23 (Original post)

rzemanfl

(29,540 posts)
17. Oh fuck. I am a "drooling lost partisan anxious to...feel good."
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:07 PM
Dec 2016

Shit. I just have to accept the fact people elected a moron dictator who is filling his cabinet with millionaires and billionaires. Congress wants to cut my Social Security. I probably don't deserve it-I only paid in since 1964. I shouldn't be so greedy, that's for the oligarchs.
Shame on me.

Odd though, that the "gang of twelve" had a meeting about all this speculative bullshit.

 

SubjectiveLife78

(67 posts)
23. Have to love politics sometimes. Those strange bedfellows and all.
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:40 PM
Dec 2016

The right, it's alright with Russia and Putin somehow. The left, in terms of the CIA, that agency that we don't really like or trust because it's overthrown all those governments, and who knows what the hell else, well if they say so, then it's all good.

blue neen

(12,306 posts)
25. The Intercept?
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 08:44 PM
Dec 2016

Screw that. Glenn Greenwald? Screw him.

Not a credible, believable, or discerning source at all. Go peddle this somewhere else.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
28. Greenwald is a Snowden/Putin sympathizer and a Libertarian who has fought
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 09:31 PM
Dec 2016

Democrats. We shouldn't be posting him here, or the Intercept.

underthematrix

(5,811 posts)
29. I tweeted greenwald that the
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 09:32 PM
Dec 2016

leaks were not anonymous. They were intelligence officials. And let him know that I know that he knows how this works.

Takket

(21,424 posts)
35. I couldn't agree more
Sat Dec 10, 2016, 10:49 PM
Dec 2016

I want Obama to have every scrap of evidence put out there, and then I want the american public to start pressuring the electors to undo this travesty on December 19th.

ecstatic

(32,566 posts)
39. Wow. Are we really still quoting that right wing racist
Sun Dec 11, 2016, 03:07 AM
Dec 2016

after everything that's happened thus far?!? Are people still not seeing the connection here? Where did Snowden run to when shit hit the fan? Who gave him asylum? Who was his biggest advocate and cheerleader? Who empowered him and made sure his propaganda reached gullible souls in the U.S.?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Anonymous Leaks to the Wa...