Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Political discussion here. Any reasonable opinion is welcome, but due to the sensitive nature of the topic area, please be nice and respectful to others. No flaming or trolling, please. And please keep political commentary out of the other board areas and confine it to this area. Thanks!
User avatar
Superbone
Posts: 25823
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:44 am
Location: San Diego, CA (Phoenix Native)

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Superbone »

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I don't have him blocked, but I just scroll past his posts and do not read them.
Unfortunately, he was the boy who cried wolf way too many times. He is the one and only poster I have blocked. I finally learned that it was a waste of my time. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Sorry, but life it too short.
"It should burn. It'll probably burn forever. But last season is done." - James Jones

"I want to be who I think I am." - Frank Kaminsky

"I don't think I've ever been that angry shooting a basketball." - Cam Johnson

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 6529
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Nodack »

I blocked SDC after my first post back at this place after I found it. I said hi to everybody and SDC chimed in with a rude post. I think it was Superbone that clued me in that SDC enjoys not making friends with people.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 18952
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Indy »

Superbone wrote:
Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:I don't have him blocked, but I just scroll past his posts and do not read them.
Unfortunately, he was the boy who cried wolf way too many times. He is the one and only poster I have blocked. I finally learned that it was a waste of my time. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Sorry, but life it too short.
Same here. I absolutely hated doing it (the idea of blocking someone really bothers me), but I had to.

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 15970
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Mori Chu »

I feel like as the site owner/admin, I can't honestly block anybody. I have to see what people are posting in case anything needs moderation. Also I can take anything sdc wants to post. I don't agree with most of it, but I can't just leave it there without even seeing what is written.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 18952
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Indy »

Good point. You can't really do that as a site mod.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3966
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:25 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by SDC »

I should block all of you instead.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 6529
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Nodack »

James Robert Clapper Jr is a retired lieutenant general in the United States Air Force and is the former Director of National Intelligence. A career intelligence officer, Clapper has held several key positions within the United States Intelligence Community. He served as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) from 1992 until 1995. He was the first director of defense intelligence within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and simultaneously the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. He served as the director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) from September 2001 until June 2006. On June 5, 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Clapper to replace Dennis C. Blair as United States Director of National Intelligence. Clapper was unanimously confirmed by the Senate for the position on August 5, 2010.

Clapper wrote a book that was just released. He is not a Trump fan in the slightest.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/ ... e202e1e19d

After more than 50 years in service, just as the avuncular Clapper, a self-styled “intelligence geezer,” was planning to retire for good from his post as overseer of America’s 17 intelligence organizations, the electoral college named Donald Trump president of the United States. And all the intelligence at Clapper’s disposal suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB agent, had made that possible. Clapper, old Cold Warrior that he was, saw his world turned upside down. Suddenly truth, as he understood the term, was out; “alternative facts” were in; and America’s old enemy had a far too cozy relationship with its new commander in chief.

So this previously reluctant public figure decided as a private citizen to speak out with a vengeance, appearing regularly on CNN (his shaved head making him look a little like Daddy Warbucks stepping out of the shadows), and with Trey Brown he has written a memoir: “Facts and Fears: Hard Truths From a Life in Intelligence.”

The book begins and ends with a bitter appraisal of Trump and the Russian plot to put him in power. “I don’t believe our democracy can function for long on lies, particularly when inconvenient and difficult facts spoken by the practitioners of truth are dismissed as ‘fake news,’ ” Clapper writes. “I know that the Intelligence Community cannot serve our nation if facts are negotiable.”

“Of course the Russian efforts affected the outcome. Surprising even themselves, they swung the election to a Trump win. To conclude otherwise stretches logic, common sense, and credulity to the breaking point. Less than eighty thousand votes in three key states swung the election. I have no doubt that more votes than that were influenced by this massive effort by the Russians.” [\i]

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 9470
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by In2ition »

No talk here about the Durham reveals today? What do you all think about them?
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann
ブランドンに行こう

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 6529
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Nodack »

In2ition wrote:
Sun Feb 13, 2022 7:07 pm
No talk here about the Durham reveals today? What do you all think about them?
Never heard of them. You brought it up. What do you think of them?

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 15970
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Mori Chu »

In2ition wrote:
Sun Feb 13, 2022 7:07 pm
No talk here about the Durham reveals today? What do you all think about them?
So far I have only seen it reported on right-wing sites like Washington Times and NY Post. I was waiting to see if anybody else was going to do a story on it. I'll hold judgment until I know more about it.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 9470
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by In2ition »

Mori Chu wrote:
Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:30 pm
In2ition wrote:
Sun Feb 13, 2022 7:07 pm
No talk here about the Durham reveals today? What do you all think about them?
So far I have only seen it reported on right-wing sites like Washington Times and NY Post. I was waiting to see if anybody else was going to do a story on it. I'll hold judgment until I know more about it.
Eventually it's going to come out by the likes of the NYT, Washington Post, CNN, and MSNBC. They will not be able to ignore it forever.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann
ブランドンに行こう

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 15970
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Mori Chu »

Here's an example thread calling BS on this story. Not saying this guy is 100% right since I'm still learning about the situation, but I do think there may be two sides to this (so far right-wing media only) story.


User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 15970
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Mori Chu »

Here's CNN reporting on the topic. Reading now.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/14/politics ... index.html

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 6529
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Nodack »

This is all BS to me. Republicans are trying find one thing to exonerate Trump from all the bad things he has done, stop playing defense and go on the offense. Their game plan? Trump was exonerated by the Mueller report and Hillary forced the FBI to illegally investigate Trump and Russian collusion and they need to lock them all up because the FBI and Democrats are evil for conspiring against Trump.

It would have been criminal for them to not investigate Trumps ties to Russia. Trumps beauty pageant was there. Trump was negotiating a new Trump Tower in Moscow right before the election. Trumps own son said after the US banks wouldn’t loan them any more money that they got all the money they needed from Russia. Several high rolling Russians rent apartments from Trump Towers at incredible prices and never stay there. Paul Manafort, the guy running Trumps 2016 election was secretly working as a pro Russian lobbyist in the Ukraine for millions before that and didn’t report it to anyone. Paul Manafort had hired Konstantin V. Kilimnik, a "Russian intelligence officer," and that Kilimnik was possibly connected to the 2016 hack and leak operation. The FBI busted him investigating the Russian collusion busted him. Trump pardoned him. Congress unanimously enacted sanction on Russia over their meddling. Trump refused. US intelligence unanimously agreed that Russia meddled in our election. Trump met with Putin and Putin denied it. Trump took Putins word over his own intelligence community. Trump surrounded himself with people who do business with and are sympathetic to Russia.

Donald Trump, Michael Flynn, Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump, Jr, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Tevfik Arif, Roger Stone, Felix Sater, Alex Shnaider, JD Gordon, Wilbur Ross, Erik Prince, Michael Cohen, George Papadopoulos all Trump people with ties to Russia and pro Russian.

Image

https://swalwell.house.gov/issues/russi ... ion-s-ties
The New York Times reported that members of Trump’s 2016 campaign and other Trump associates had frequent contact with senior Russian intelligence officials throughout the campaign.

G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/p ... eport.html
The report is an exhaustive look at the various ways that the Kremlin’s intelligence services exploited ties to the Trump campaign to help carry out a stealth attack on American democracy.

The report’s findings about Mr. Kilimnik and other Russians in touch with Trump campaign advisers confirmed an article in The New York Times from 2017 that said there had been numerous interactions between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence in the year before the election.

So an investigation into whether Trumps ties to Russia should have been investigated in the first place is comical to me. Of course those obvious ties should have been investigated. This whole investigate the FBI for investigating Trumps teams ties to Russia is ridiculous and blame Hillary again just makes me sigh. Pin the investigation on whomever you like. I don’t care. He tried to steal the election by several different schemes and lied his ass off and attempted a coup. This little deflection isn’t moving the bar for me at all.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 18952
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Indy »

Here is a really good rundown of all of this (original twitter thread here.)

MUCH easier to read via the threadreader app, but I pasted it below.
I suppose I need to do a proper thread about this Durham filing folks are losing their minds over. OK, here goes.
First, virtually none of what appeared in the recent filing from Durham’s office is new information. Here’s a New York Times story from *over four months ago* with basically all of it.
----------
Trump Server Mystery Produces Fresh Conflict--
A recent indictment suggested that researchers who found strange internet links between a Russian bank and the Trump Organization did not really believe their own work. They are pushing back.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/01/us/p ... tment.html
-----------

Second, nothing in the filing supports breathless claims technically illiterate cable hosts are making. It does not allege anyone “hacked” Trump computers, or was paid to “infiltrate” networks, or that anyone “intercepted e-mails and text messages."
Here’s a simplified version of what it does say, again, virtually all of which was reported in an obscure little alternative news outlet called The New York Times back in September.

A Virginia-based tech company called Neustar, which provides a variety of Internet registry & security services, had lawful access to databases of government DNS data as part of a contract to monitor for malware & cyberattacks, which was provided to Georgia Tech researchers.

For the non-technical: “DNS” = “Domain Name System.” It’s basically the Internet’s equivalent of a phone directory, translating human-intelligible addresses like “Cato.org” into the numerical IP addresses computers use to send each other information.

DNS lookup data, which is what Neustar & the Georgia Tech researchers had, does not include the contents of Internet traffic. It tells you when a computer was looking for the address of another computer. (“Hey, address book, I need the current IP address of website-dot-com.”)

The GA Tech researchers—whose job was to look for suspicious patterns in the DNS record they’d been provided—found various things they regarded as suspicious.

In particular, they found evidence of unusual volumes of traffic between servers associated with the Trump Organization and a Russian bank, as well as evidence of (rare in the US) Russian-made smartphones near the White House.

The researchers wrote up their suspicions, which then-Neustar executive Rodney Joffe passed on to attorney Michael Sussman, who also did work for the Clinton campaign. Sussman shared their findings with the FBI and later CIA.

Some aspects of this are potentially shady. There’s likely an innoccuous explanation for the data the researchers found suspicious, and both they and Joffe seem to have disliked Trump.

Obviously, I don’t have the data they looked at, and wouldn’t be qualified to evaluate it if I did. Durham seems to think their views of Trump colored their evaluation of how suspicious the data was. I don’t know, but it’s possible.

That said: Neither Joffe nor the GA Tech researchers were being paid by the Clinton campaign. Nobody “hacked” or “intercepted” anything. They were analyzing data they had lawful access to, in order to look for suspicious patterns that might suggest foreign cyberattacks.

Neither Joffe nor the researchers are accused of any crime. Sussman is accused of lying about whether he was working on Clinton’s behalf when he passed their findings on to FBI, which he denies.

So is there anything to this? Well, maybe! But probably not a ton. It’s possible that Joffe & the researchers read the data as more suspicious than it really was, and that their negative view of Trump influenced their interpretation of what they were seeing.

That’s clearly Durham’s view. I don’t know; again, I’m not competent to check their work, but it’s possible.

That said, I haven’t seen anyone who IS competent suggest that this was some crazy fabrication. In other words, it’s not that it wasn’t suspicious, it’s that it WAS suspicious but maybe there turns out be an innocent explanation.

In any event, it’s a little difficult to see what any of these parties are supposed to have done wrong. They found suspicious traffic in data they were lawfully provided to analyze for that purpose, and reported their findings to law enforcement.

Maybe it turns out there was nothing there—it’s frankly still not completely clear what the traffic was—but there’s no evidence suggesting any of this was elaborately masterminded by Hillary Clinton.

The rather tenuous Clinton link is that Joffe passed the researchers’ findings on to FBI & CIA via Sussman, a prominent cybersecurity lawyer who’d also done work for the Clinton campaign.

Durham says Sussman was working on Clinton’s behalf as well as Joffe’s when he met with FBI officials to convey the data, and lied about it. Sussman denies this, and the evidence seems pretty thin, but we’ll see how that plays out in court.

Two pertinent points: The White House data concerning Russian phones dated from the Obama administration, and was shared with CIA well after the campaign (and Sussman’s work for the campaign) ended. So that doesn’t square well with Durham’s theory.

So is this all a big nothingburger? Well, no, not entirely. But (as with previous FISA stories), the right media’s desire to find a huge dramatic Watergate-level conspiracy is obscuring the kernel of a legitimate policy issue.

What I see as the legitimate policy issue is that you’ve got private cybersecurity researchers & companies making somewhat ad-hoc decisions about when to disclose nonpublic telecommunications data to the government.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act spells out a legal process by which FBI (or other law enforcement) can obtain telecommunications metadata from providers. Providers may not disclose it directly to government outside that process, with specific exceptions.

With the Alfa Bank data, you’ve apparently got researchers conveying information gleaned from Neustar’s DNS lookups to law enforcement via an intermediary. That was probably legal, but also reflects a loophole in federal privacy law.

And I think there’s an important policy conversation to have about that: Are we comfortable with a status quo where outside researchers get this sort of access to your DNS lookups, and then hand that data to the FBI if they deem it suspicious?

Especially where, as here, the stated purpose is to look for signs of foreign cyberattacks, but what gets reported is not really evidence of an apparent attack on the U.S. firm.

So there IS, I think, a potential story and a serious policy issue here. It’s just about a million miles away from “ZOMG Killary hacked Trump's computers at the White House.”

The serious story is about who has access to our DNS data—which is not traffic content, but nevertheless potentially quite revealing—and under what circumstances it can be shared with the government.

And there are concerning features of this case, I think, even if we put aside the “Grand Hillary Plot” version of the story. The Alfa link ended up leaking to the press just before the election, although with an exculpatory framing.

Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia (Published 2016)
After lengthy investigations, officials also believe that a hacking of Democratic emails was aimed at disrupting the election rather than electing Mr. Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/p ... trump.html

Even without the Grand Plot narrative, this should be troubling. Researchers with (legal) access to nonpublic Internet metadata spot something they deem suspicious linked to a presidential candidate.

They share this with the FBI, thanks to a loophole in the law that bypasses the judicial process. Congress gets briefed, and soon it’s on the front page of the newspaper shortly before an election.

Do I think the Clinton campaign orchestrated all this? No. Is it great for democracy that ambiguous analysis of Internet traffic linked to candidates is disclosed at the discretion of security researchers? Also no.

Again, as with FISA, this seems to interest the frothier corners of the media only to the extent it feeds into a narrative about some kind of insidious conspiracy. And the evidence for that just ain’t there.

But there is, I think, evidence that fuzzy rules around access to (and sharing of) metadata end up making the disclosure of sensitive data most of us would expect to be private highly discretionary.

And I think you can reasonably question whether that’s how we want this stuff to work, without it being a crime, or a plot, or BIGGER THAN WATERGATE.

I will, incidentally, note something of a pattern here. There were serious problems with the FISA process used to target Carter Page. But it was only interesting if it was part of a Deep State Plot to Get Trump.

There are valid questions to raise about the unmasking of Tucker Carlson’s identity in disseminated intelligence reports gleaned from monitoring of Russian officials, but it turned into fantasies about NSA SPYING ON ME TO TAKE MY SHOW OFF THE AIR.

Here we have a story that I think ought to be at least somewhat concerning about the potential political impact of gaps in federal rules governing access to and sharing of telecommunications metadata.

The coverage from right-wing media is a technically illiterate conspiracy corkboard covered in yarn, and the mainstream coverage thus far has mostly been about pointing out why that’s silly and wrong.

In all of these cases, the compulsive need to generate conspiratorial froth pitched at outraging people half-watching cable from a barstool obscures the kernel of a real story. Not the SCANDAL OF THE CENTURY, but a story meriting thought and attention.

And then coverage by more serious reporters end up itself being conditioned by the froth (and the need to whack through the many, many false claims bubbling out of it).

And the latter is sort of understandable! You have Fox hosts literally saying, verbatim, “Hillary Clinton hired people who hacked into Donald Trump’s home and office computers and planted evidence…”. Every part of that is a preposterous lie.

So you almost have to clear the air before you can get to the real story. And maybe the commercial imperatives driving journalism make the “Sexy Scandal or Nothingburger?” Frame inevitable. But it’s too bad.

A final note: Again, none of this is new information. The New York Times reported all this four months ago. The current freakout follows Durham’s inclusion of it in an oddly lengthy “background” section to a completely unrelated motion.

So this does look a bit like an effort from Durham’s camp to fan the flames, though the really outrageous lies the cable talkers came up with don’t resemble anything in Durham’s filing.

I note that we are coming up on 3 years of the Durham probe, during which time he has successfully prosecuted one case of genuine misconduct by a DOJ lawyer, handed to him on a silver platter by the IG, and filed one very weak-looking case for lying to the FBI against a lawyer.

As @emptywheel & others have noted, this comes right after the statute of limitations lapsed for any charges to conceivably be brought concerning the 2017 CIA meeting.

So there’s an odor to all this of an effort to create the appearance of having uncovered some grand conspiracy that Durham has no intention of attempting to actually prove or charge.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 9470
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by In2ition »

I tend to agree with most of this assessment. I thought that the filing was very minor and people made too much about it. I don't think it was "an effort from Durham's camp to fan the flames" though. Durham has been pretty apolitical, he is just doing a job, and not necessarily to one side or the other, and this tries to paint him as some partisan hack.

Here's the other thing. I think a lot of people tend to believe that this is either HUGE and damning or that this is the extent of anything that Durham is going to find and it's pathetic and fizzles out. I'm not in either of these camps. I don't think it's much more than a minor filing, but much more is coming in the future. The good thing is that Durham hasn't had anything leak, so he's running a tight ship and doing his best to find the truth. Whatever the truth is. If there were all kinds of leaks, you wouldn't be wrong to assume it was partisan and politically motivated, imo.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann
ブランドンに行こう

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 15970
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Mori Chu »

Indy wrote:
Wed Feb 16, 2022 2:19 pm
Here is a really good rundown of all of this (original twitter thread here.)

MUCH easier to read via the threadreader app, but I pasted it below.
Thanks; that thread was informative.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 9470
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by In2ition »

BREAKING NEWS: Hillary Clinton APPROVED sharing debunked 'covert' communications between Trump and Kremlin-backed bank with press - even though she wasn't 'totally confident' in the legitimacy, ex-campaign manager tells Durham trial
  • Robby Mook testified on Friday about the campaign meeting on the data
  • He told the trial of Michael Sussman that he was first briefed about Alfa Bank by campaign general counsel Marc Elias
  • Mook also said he discussed the data with Jake Sullivan and John Podesta
  • Admitted the campaign wasn't 'totally confident' in the 'legitimacy of the data', but was hoping a reporter could get it confirmed
  • Sussman is accused of lying to the FBI about the fact that he was representing Clinton's 2016 campaign interests and that of another client

By WILLS ROBINSON FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 12:40 EDT, 20 May 2022 | UPDATED: 12:44 EDT, 20 May 2022
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... laims.html

Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager Robby Mook told a court on Friday that she signed off on sharing debunked allegations linking Donald Trump and the Kremlin-backed Alfa Bank with the media in the run-up to the 2016 election.

Mook told the trial of Michael Sussman, the first to be indicted by Special Counsel John Durham in his Russia origins probe, that he was first briefed about Alfa Bank by campaign general counsel Marc Elias.

He said he also discussed with then senior advisor Jake Sullivan - now the White House National Security advisor - and campaign chairman John Podesta about whether to share the information with a reporter.

'I discussed it with Hillary as well,' Mook told the court. He also admitted the campaign wasn't 'totally confident in the legitimacy of the data', but was hoping a reporter would follow it up and determine if it was 'accurate' or 'substantive'

'I don't remember the substance of the conversation, but notionally, the discussion was, hey, we have this and we want to share it with a reporter,' Mook said.

They decided to share it with the reporter after the meeting, he testified.

'I recall it being a member of our press staff,' Mook said . 'We authorized a staff member to share it with the media.'
Spoiler: show/hide
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann
ブランドンに行こう

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 15970
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by Mori Chu »

Daily Mail is a UK tabloid. Real source, please.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 9470
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Trump accuses Obama of Bugging Trump Tower (with zero evidence)

Post by In2ition »

I thought it was the Sun that was the UK tabloid.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann
ブランドンに行こう

Post Reply