The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
If It's Yellow Let It Mellow [Trump/Russia Scandal]: Timeline, News, Analysis
The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said.
The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence, the sources said.
Investigators are examining how money may have moved from the Kremlin to covertly help Trump win, the two sources said. One of the allegations involves whether a system for routinely paying thousands of Russian-American pensioners may have been used to pay some email hackers in the United States or to supply money to intermediaries who would then pay the hackers, the two sources said.
The informal, inter-agency working group began to explore possible Russian interference last spring, long before the FBI received information from a former British spy hired to develop politically damaging and unverified research about Trump, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry.
The BBC reported that the FBI had obtained a warrant on Oct. 15 from the highly secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court allowing investigators access to bank records and other documents about potential payments and money transfers related to Russia. One of McClatchy’s sources confirmed the report.
Susan Hennessey, a former attorney for the National Security Agency who is now a fellow at the Brookings Institution, said she had no knowledge that a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant had been issued. However, she stressed that such warrants are issued only if investigators can demonstrate “probable cause” that a crime has been committed and the information in Steele’s dossier couldn’t have met that test.
“If, in fact, law enforcement has obtained a FISA warrant, that is an indication that additional evidence exists outside of the dossier,” she said.
How much power does the President have to shut that down?
I was digging through files when I fancied myself an up and coming cartoonist and found this. It was my thoughts on McAfee circa 2011
Just so we're clear AH this is gold. If this was my first introduction to a strip I'd at least look through a few months of strips to see if you could get another laugh like that out of me.
+15
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
I was digging through files when I fancied myself an up and coming cartoonist and found this. It was my thoughts on McAfee circa 2011
Just so we're clear AH this is gold. If this was my first introduction to a strip I'd at least look through a few months of strips to see if you could get another laugh like that out of me.
Ha thanks!
I did like 200 some odd comics between 2008 and 2012 I just wasn't going anywhere so I started doing other stuff.
are YOU on the beer list?
0
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
I was digging through files when I fancied myself an up and coming cartoonist and found this. It was my thoughts on McAfee circa 2011
Just so we're clear AH this is gold. If this was my first introduction to a strip I'd at least look through a few months of strips to see if you could get another laugh like that out of me.
So the New York Times' public editor wrote a column about their reporting on this. Well, a column about the lack of publishing of their reporting. It's a good read, and she's fairly harsh.
...Conversations over what to publish were prolonged and lively, involving Washington and New York, and often including the executive editor, Dean Baquet. If the allegations were true, it was a huge story. If false, they could damage The Times’s reputation. With doubts about the material and with the F.B.I. discouraging publication, editors decided to hold their fire.
But was that the right decision? Was there a way to write about some of these allegations using sound journalistic principles but still surfacing the investigation and important leads? Eventually, The Times did just that, but only after other news outlets had gone first.
I have spoken privately with several journalists involved in the reporting last fall, and I believe a strong case can be made that The Times was too timid in its decisions not to publish the material it had.
I appreciate the majority view that there wasn’t enough proof of a link between Trump and the Kremlin to write a hard-hitting story. But The Times knew several critical facts: the F.B.I. had a sophisticated investigation underway on Trump’s organization, possibly including FISA warrants. (Some news outlets now report that the F.B.I. did indeed have such warrants, an indication of probable cause.) Investigators had identified a mysterious communication channel, partly through a lead from anti-Trump operatives
It gets harsher towards the end.
There is an unsettling theme that runs through The Times’s publishing decisions. In each instance, it was the actions of government officials that triggered newsroom decisions — not additional reporting or insight that journalists gained. On the server, once the F.B.I. signaled it had grown wary of its importance — without giving conclusive evidence as to why — the paper backed off. Weeks later, the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid, publicly admonished the F.B.I. for being secretive about its probe of Trump. That gave The Times cover to write what it knew about the bureau’s investigation into the bank server.
It was the same pattern on the dossier. Only after learning from CNN that Trump and President Obama had been briefed on the document did The Times publish what it had known for months. Its confidence in the material had not changed, nor did its editors know whether the top level briefing meant the government believed the information was true. But the briefing became justifiable cause to publish.
In this cat-and-mouse game between government and press, the government won.
After-action insights are easier than in-the-moment decisions. Back then, the media still thought Trump was a weak challenger to Clinton, a mind-set that might have made taking the risk of publishing explosive allegations all the more fraught.
But it’s hard not to wonder what impact such information might have had on voters still evaluating the candidates, an issue I chided The Times for not pursuing enough in an earlier column. Would more sources have come forward? Would we already know the essential facts?
If the new president was in fact colluding with a foreign adversary, journalists and investigators should feel enormous pressure to conclusively establish that fact. If it is not true, both Trump and the country deserve to have this issue put to rest.
Too little and far too late, but hopefully people will learn from this.
Funny they didn't have that discussion about the Hilary email stories
They seem to not want to break "edgy" news. So they could report on the Hillary emails because other outlets were already talking about them. It seems that they are resting too much on their own weighty dignity. They have to allow "lesser" news outlets like Buzzfeed to break scurrilous stories, because they don't want to sully their typewriters on the mucky and dubious.
Funny they didn't have that discussion about the Hilary email stories
They seem to not want to break "edgy" news. So they could report on the Hillary emails because other outlets were already talking about them. It seems that they are resting too much on their own weighty dignity. They have to allow "lesser" news outlets like Buzzfeed to break scurrilous stories, because they don't want to sully their typewriters on the mucky and dubious.
Buzzfeed's about to get a rising reputation, and The Times is going to fall.
Exactly the problem. They cared more about the optics of running the story than the veracity of it's claims. They'r fine printing bullshit so long as everyone else it doing it to. That's pathetic for a media outlet of such repute.
Exactly the problem. They cared more about the optics of running the story than the veracity of it's claims. They'r fine printing bullshit so long as everyone else it doing it to. That's pathetic for a media outlet of such repute.
What worries me is how much control the FBI had over the story, they were the main driver for this.
Funny they didn't have that discussion about the Hilary email stories
They seem to not want to break "edgy" news. So they could report on the Hillary emails because other outlets were already talking about them. It seems that they are resting too much on their own weighty dignity. They have to allow "lesser" news outlets like Buzzfeed to break scurrilous stories, because they don't want to sully their typewriters on the mucky and dubious.
Buzzfeed's about to get a rising reputation, and The Times is going to fall.
Not as long as 90% of their (Buzzfeed's) articles are dreck. The quality press needs to get its nose out of the air and start reporting again.
Funny they didn't have that discussion about the Hilary email stories
They seem to not want to break "edgy" news. So they could report on the Hillary emails because other outlets were already talking about them. It seems that they are resting too much on their own weighty dignity. They have to allow "lesser" news outlets like Buzzfeed to break scurrilous stories, because they don't want to sully their typewriters on the mucky and dubious.
Buzzfeed's about to get a rising reputation, and The Times is going to fall.
Not as long as 90% of their (Buzzfeed's) articles are dreck. The quality press needs to get its nose out of the air and start reporting again.
They need to have a separate brand for their "legitimate" press, like how The Onion has The AV Club.
Funny they didn't have that discussion about the Hilary email stories
They seem to not want to break "edgy" news. So they could report on the Hillary emails because other outlets were already talking about them. It seems that they are resting too much on their own weighty dignity. They have to allow "lesser" news outlets like Buzzfeed to break scurrilous stories, because they don't want to sully their typewriters on the mucky and dubious.
Buzzfeed's about to get a rising reputation, and The Times is going to fall.
Not as long as 90% of their (Buzzfeed's) articles are dreck. The quality press needs to get its nose out of the air and start reporting again.
If they follow this trend dreck won't be what they're known for. The media may be in for a change, like what happened with the Daily Show.
+2
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Teamregular
But yes, if their stories came from a new media outlet called "The National Observer" or whatever, it would not be as easy to crack jokes about the outlet being the same place where you can find out if you are a joey or a chandler.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
ABC has some news on a potential source of the more salacious allegations in the dossier. The potential source is a one time Russian government translator that has claimed ties to Trump that the Trump people have strongly denied and heads an organization that was suspected of being a front organization.
US-Russian Businessman Said to Be Source of Key Trump Dossier Claims
The source of the most salacious allegations in the uncorroborated dossier about President Trump and the Russians is a one-time Russian government translator, according to a person familiar with the raw intelligence provided to the FBI.
Sergei Millian, a naturalized American citizen who most recently headed a group called the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce, says he was in Moscow at the time the dossier accuses the billionaire American businessman of being involved with Russian prostitutes. Millian claims to have helped Trump recruit Russian investors and he posted pictures of himself attending several black tie events during last week’s inauguration.
He is the man, the people familiar with the un-redacted dossier tell ABC News, who may have unwittingly described Trump’s alleged tryst, during a conversation with someone who was secretly reporting to Christopher Steele.
While the published dossier never names Millian, a version provided to the FBI included Millian’s name as a source, according to someone who has seen the version given to the FBI.
In recent weeks, Trump’s team has said Millian is not who is says he is -- he never worked in any capacity with the Trump Organization, and who had to be warned to stop describing himself as a Trump-approved broker. Millian had for months granted interviews in Russian media making that claim. And he did so during his interview with ABC News in July 2016.
Michael Cohen, who is now President’s Trump’s personal lawyer, told ABC News that he exchanged emails with Millian in order to tell him to stop exaggerating his ties to the Trump Organization. Cohen says he wrote Millian to say it had become clear “that you too are seeking media attention off of this false narrative of a Trump-Russia alliance,” and to ask him to stop “attempting to inject yourself into this crazy, Clinton campaign lie.”
The Russian-American Chamber had listed the Trump Organization as one of its sponsors, but removed the name during the summer of 2016. Millian ran the group from an office in Atlanta before moving to New York. The group’s tax records indicate it had only a modest income and operating budget.
In November, the British newspaper Financial Times wrote that Millian’s name surfaced on the FBI’s radar after he reportedly participated in a 2011 trip to Moscow for 50 American businessmen and offered to arrange future junkets. According to the newspaper, the FBI later asked Americans participating in the trip whether Russian intelligence tried to recruit them. One of the businessmen, the newspaper reported, said the FBI told him they suspected that some of the people who organized the trips were spies.
Intelligence experts told ABC News that aspects of Millian’s background raised concerns for them. Paul Joyal, managing director of National Strategies (NSI)., told ABC News that the Russian-American chamber of commerce reminded him of a “classic Soviet front organization.”
ABC has some news on a potential source of the more salacious allegations in the dossier. The potential source is a one time Russian government translator that has claimed ties to Trump that the Trump people have strongly denied and heads an organization that was suspected of being a front organization.
So now that he's burned, he's going to have an accident, any day now right? Before he can talk more.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
Am I being overly paranoid if my first thought on reading that wasn't 'you have outlived your usefulness?'
No. Panda's probably got it right, IMO. If the FSB dude figured out how much he could pull down exposing whatever the fuck he knows about this insane charade to western media there's a chance he'd be out of Russia in a flash and we Putin just can't have that now, can we he?
Supporters of Vladimir Putin are holding an all-night party in Moscow to celebrate the inauguration of Donald Trump.
One of the organisers, Konstantin Rykov, who has served as a Russian MP affiliated to Putin’s United Russia Party and has also been described as a “Kremlin web propagandist”, invited his facebook followers to the event with the comment: “See you in the evening. Washington will be ours.”
A top cybersecurity specialist in Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) was arrested on Wednesday reportedly on suspicion of leaking information to the U.S. intelligence community — a bombshell accusation that, if true, would mean Washington had a spy in the heart of Russia’s national defense infrastructure.
According to the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, the FSB believes Sergei Mikhailov tipped off U.S. officials to information about Vladimir Fomenko and his server rental company “King Servers,” which the American cybersecurity company ThreatConnect identified last September as “an information nexus” that was used by hackers suspected of working for Russian state security in cyberattacks.
The article goes on to say that four others have been arrested in connection to the treason case against Mikhailov. It is important to note that even if these are the charges, in a country like Russia, what you're charged with isn't just not necessarily true. It may not even be what the state and prosecutors think is true.
A top cybersecurity specialist in Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) was arrested on Wednesday reportedly on suspicion of leaking information to the U.S. intelligence community — a bombshell accusation that, if true, would mean Washington had a spy in the heart of Russia’s national defense infrastructure.
According to the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, the FSB believes Sergei Mikhailov tipped off U.S. officials to information about Vladimir Fomenko and his server rental company “King Servers,” which the American cybersecurity company ThreatConnect identified last September as “an information nexus” that was used by hackers suspected of working for Russian state security in cyberattacks.
The article goes on to say that four others have been arrested in connection to the treason case against Mikhailov. It is important to note that even if these are the charges, in a country like Russia, what you're charged with isn't just not necessarily true. It may not even be what the state and prosecutors think is true.
If that's what actually happened I would be shocked if that is what he was charged with; given the tacit admission it carries. I would think something more like:
Charged with running a rogue operation on the servers
Charged with taking bribes from the CIA, but feeding false information about the servers
Charged with selling secrets that are secret and totally not about those servers; what servers are you even talking about
I am going to insert a dose of cynical realism here: If this guy really did tip off the US to Russia's hacking of the DNC, does Putin really have him arrested in public and put on trial for treason? Is there some sort of domestic advantage angle at play here?
I am going to insert a dose of cynical realism here: If this guy really did tip off the US to Russia's hacking of the DNC, does Putin really have him arrested in public and put on trial for treason? Is there some sort of domestic advantage angle at play here?
I am going to insert a dose of cynical realism here: If this guy really did tip off the US to Russia's hacking of the DNC, does Putin really have him arrested in public and put on trial for treason? Is there some sort of domestic advantage angle at play here?
You don't just make them disappear, you slander their name first.
I don't know that that headline is actually anywhere close to correct. He was "a senior official" in the branch. The FSB's cyber-intelligence branch is probably pretty large and does many things
edit: I agree with the above, they likely found a spy and decided to go public. If we follow the "destabilize the west" theory, this probably makes the most sense
I don't see why you guys are so obsessed with this. I haven't seen anything about it on the news in a loooong time, so there must not be anything there. Not like HRC's emails.
Posts
P. much.
Link to full article: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article127231799.html
With Trump's pick I assume it would be the Saturday Night "Yes sir, right away" this time around.
Just so we're clear AH this is gold. If this was my first introduction to a strip I'd at least look through a few months of strips to see if you could get another laugh like that out of me.
Ha thanks!
I did like 200 some odd comics between 2008 and 2012 I just wasn't going anywhere so I started doing other stuff.
Fwiw it made me chuckle too.
It gets harsher towards the end.
Too little and far too late, but hopefully people will learn from this.
They seem to not want to break "edgy" news. So they could report on the Hillary emails because other outlets were already talking about them. It seems that they are resting too much on their own weighty dignity. They have to allow "lesser" news outlets like Buzzfeed to break scurrilous stories, because they don't want to sully their typewriters on the mucky and dubious.
Buzzfeed's about to get a rising reputation, and The Times is going to fall.
What worries me is how much control the FBI had over the story, they were the main driver for this.
Not as long as 90% of their (Buzzfeed's) articles are dreck. The quality press needs to get its nose out of the air and start reporting again.
They need to have a separate brand for their "legitimate" press, like how The Onion has The AV Club.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
If they follow this trend dreck won't be what they're known for. The media may be in for a change, like what happened with the Daily Show.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-russian-businessman-source-key-trump-dossier-claims/story?id=45019603
Oh, I see. This is all Hillary's fault. Sorry Trump, she won't be your waifu.
So now that he's burned, he's going to have an accident, any day now right? Before he can talk more.
No. Panda's probably got it right, IMO. If the FSB dude figured out how much he could pull down exposing whatever the fuck he knows about this insane charade to western media there's a chance he'd be out of Russia in a flash and we Putin just can't have that now, can we he?
(And thus, we probably never will.)
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/wow-it-gets-bigger
Charged with running a rogue operation on the servers
Charged with taking bribes from the CIA, but feeding false information about the servers
Charged with selling secrets that are secret and totally not about those servers; what servers are you even talking about
Snitches get stitches?
You don't just make them disappear, you slander their name first.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I don't know that that headline is actually anywhere close to correct. He was "a senior official" in the branch. The FSB's cyber-intelligence branch is probably pretty large and does many things
edit: I agree with the above, they likely found a spy and decided to go public. If we follow the "destabilize the west" theory, this probably makes the most sense
The CIA said this Gerasimov guy said you hacked us, is that true? Don't tell anyone though, they said it was a secret.