Donald Trump has been asking witnesses what they told Robert Mueller. Oh, that's a no no.

Courtesy of the New York Times:  

The special counsel in the Russia investigation has learned of two conversations in recent months in which President Trump asked key witnesses about matters they discussed with investigators, according to three people familiar with the encounters. 

In one episode, the president told an aide that the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, should issue a statement denying a New York Times article in January. The article said Mr. McGahn told investigators that the president once asked him to fire the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. McGahn never released a statement and later had to remind the president that he had indeed asked Mr. McGahn to see that Mr. Mueller was dismissed, the people said. 

In the other episode, Mr. Trump asked his former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion. 

The episodes demonstrate that even as the special counsel investigation appears to be intensifying, the president has ignored his lawyers’ advice to avoid doing anything publicly or privately that could create the appearance of interfering with it.

Yeah, because he is TERRIFIED of what they might find.

And as it turns out he should be terrified.

Courtesy of WaPo: 

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has gathered evidence that a secret meeting in Seychelles just before the inauguration of Donald Trump was an effort to establish a back channel between the incoming administration and the Kremlin — apparently contradicting statements made to lawmakers by one of its participants, according to people familiar with the matter. 

In January 2017, Erik Prince, the founder of the private security company Blackwater, met with a Russian official close to Russian President Vladi­mir Putin and later described the meeting to congressional investigators as a chance encounter that was not a planned discussion of U.S.-Russia relations. 

A witness cooperating with Mueller has told investigators the meeting was set up in advance so that a representative of the Trump transition could meet with an emissary from Moscow to discuss future relations between the countries, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. 

George Nader, a Lebanese American businessman who helped organize and attended the Seychelles meeting, has testified on the matter before a grand jury gathering evidence about discussions between the Trump transition team and emissaries of the Kremlin, as part of Mueller’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 election.

So, yet another former Trump campaign operative has lied to the Special Counsel. 

And this one lied about trying to set up a secret communication pipeline between Trump's White House and the Kremlin.

Gee, that seems a tad suspicious.

Keep in mind that Prince is the brother of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos whose husband's medical facility was repeatedly communicating with a computer in the Trump Organization during the campaign. (By the way the only other group contacting that computer over and over again was the Russian Alfa Bank.)

Now if you do not think these two things are connected in some way I have a bridge in hurricane devastated Puerto Rico to sell you. 

So did the Russian hackers get hacked? Maybe.

Courtesy of the Daily Beast:

The Kremlin-backed troll farm at the center of Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election has quietly suffered a catastrophic security breach, The Daily Beast has confirmed, in a leak that spilled new details of its operations onto obscure corners of the internet. 

The Russian “information exchange” Joker.Buzz, which auctions off often stolen or confidential information, advertised a leak for a large cache of the Internet Research Agency’s (IRA) internal documents. It includes names of Americans, activists in particular, whom the organization specifically targeted; American-based proxies used to access Reddit and the viral meme site 9Gag; and login information for troll farm accounts. 

Even the advertisement for the document dump provides a trove of previously unknown information about the breadth of Russia’s disinformation effort in the United States, including rallies pushed by IRA social media accounts that turned violent.

What the Daily Beast was able to confirm:  

While the date of the auction could not be independently confirmed, the authenticity of the leak can. The leaked documents list screen names connected to a number of American citizens who were used as unwitting proxies by the Russians. The Daily Beast was able to track down four of those citizens, whose names have not been previously revealed. The leak contains precise dates in 2016 in which the IRA-created account Blacktivist reached out to those U.S. citizens, plus a short description of the conversations. The Daily Beast spoke to those citizens, and confirmed they interacted with the Blacktivist account in the ways described by the IRA in the document. In one case, the American even provided screenshots of his interactions with the Russian troll trying to dupe him. 

In short, the leaked document contains details of the Russian disinformation campaign that have not been previously made public—details which The Daily Beast was able to confirm. 

The leak shows that even as the Russian trolls were able to influence and manipulate American political discourse online, they were less equipped to keep their own secrets. While The Daily Beast does not possess anything close to a comprehensive trove of the IRA’s internal operations, it is now likely that substantial amounts of the troll farm’s files are waiting to be discovered online.

This data treasure trove also reveals how the troll farm utilized social media sites like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Reddit, and even Tumblr to spread their divisive propaganda and promote the Donald Trump campaign. 

It is also more proof that the investigations in Russian interference is not a "witch hunt" but rather a very important, and necessary step in protecting ourselves from future manipulation and interference.

The White House is pushing the idea that the Russian interference had no impact on the outcome of the 2016 election. But that is false.

Deputy A.G. Rod Rosenstein stated at the News Conference: “There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2018

That tweet is actually part of a longer campaign by the Trump White House to dismiss the impact of the Russian interference by claiming that even if it happened it did not have any effect.

But that is NOT what the intelligence agencies determined.

Courtesy of Politico:  

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on Thursday rebuffed a claim by Vice President Mike Pence that intelligence officials concluded that Russian meddling didn't have "any impact on the outcome of the 2016 election," saying it "stretches credulity" to say Moscow's interference didn't affect any voters' decisions.

"The intelligence community has neither the authority nor the capability to make such a judgment as to whether there was or was not impact on the election," Clapper said. "And we did not say that." 

Clapper added that it was "absolutely" possible that foreign influence campaigns had swayed voters, even though authorities had not made a definitive ruling on the matter. 

“I will say now that I’m not in an official position that it stretches credulity, given the magnitude, scope and depth of the Russian efforts, that they didn’t have impact on individual voter decisions," Clapper said. "But again, the intelligence community did not and could not gauge the impact on individual voter decisions.”

And keep in mind that just because these most recent indictments make no allegations that the meddling changed the outcome of the election, does not mean that is the conclusion of the intelligence agencies, or that it will be Mueller's ultimate conclusion.

Wired Magazine certainly disagrees that the Russians did not alter the outcome of the election in an article entitled DID RUSSIA AFFECT THE 2016 ELECTION? IT’S NOW UNDENIABLE: 

The groups and narratives identified in the indictment were integral parts of the frenzied election circus that built momentum, shaped perceptions, and activated a core base of support for now-President Trump—just as they helped disgust and dismay other groups, making them less likely to vote (or to vote for marginal candidates in protest). 

In the indictment, Trump campaign officials are referred to as “unwitting” participants in Russian information warfare. This gives the White House an out—and a chance to finally act against what the Kremlin did. But the evidence presented in the indictment makes it increasingly hard to say Russian efforts to influence the American mind were a failure.

In my mind there has never really been a question of whether the Russians altered the outcome of the election.

Of course they did.

But they also had help from James Comey, the House Republicans with their constant investigations, and the American media.

I am not sure that the Russians could have pulled this off without that extra help, but I do know that with this victory they are only going to amplify their efforts in the elections to come.

Putting in place strong sanctions, and protections, might head that off.

But with Putin's puppet in the White House, we know that will likely not happen.

Joe Biden says that the Obama Administration wanted a bipartisan response to the Russian interference in the last election but were blocked by Mitch McConnell.

Courtesy of Politico:  

Joe Biden said Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stopped the Obama administration from speaking out about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign by refusing to sign on to a bipartisan statement of condemnation. 

That moment, the former Democratic vice president said, made him think “the die had been cast ... this was all about the political play.” 

He expressed regret, in hindsight, given the intelligence he says came in after Election Day. "Had we known what we knew three weeks later, we may have done something more,” Biden, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, said. 

Biden was speaking at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations, a block from his old office at the Old Executive Office Building, to discuss his new article in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, “How to Stand Up to the Kremlin.”

As you might expect McConnell disagrees strongly with this characterization of eventts.

However I reported this exact same event back in December of 2016: 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is rejecting bipartisan calls for a special committee to investigate Russian interference in the U.S. election, which American intelligence says was aimed in part at helping Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton. 

What's more a former Obama White House staff echoed Biden's version of events:  

“Our administration's interest in making sure the response was bipartisan wasn't for the sake of being bipartisan. It was necessary because we needed the buy-in from state and local election administrators (many of whom were Republican partisans and/or skeptical of federal government),” the official argued in an email. “Unfortunately, as is well documented, Senator McConnell was unwilling to help — only making matters worse.”

Let's face it Mitch McConnell does not care about protecting American election integrity just so long as the meddling benefits his party's candidate.

Since Donald Trump is abdicating his responsibilities, the Democrats have released a report on Russia's continued interference in Western democracies around the world.

Today I'm releasing a #RussiaReport documenting Vladimir Putin's 20-year attack on democratic institutions in his own country and Europe. To protect against what the Kremlin did to the U.S. in 2016, we need to first understand Putin's pattern. https://t.co/93mMMbGEgV

— Senator Ben Cardin (@SenatorCardin) January 10, 2018

Courtesy of the AP:

A new report by Senate Democrats warns of deepening Russian interference throughout Europe and concludes that even as some Western democracies have responded with aggressive countermeasures, President Donald Trump has offered no strategic plan to bolster their efforts or safeguard the U.S. from again falling victim to Kremlin meddling. 

The report commissioned by the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the first from Congress to comprehensively detail Russian efforts to undermine democracies since the 2016 presidential election. It wastes no time in calling out Trump personally for what it describes as a failure to respond to Russia’s mounting destabilization activities in the U.S. and worldwide. 

“Never before has a U.S. president so clearly ignored such a grave and growing threat to U.S. national security,” the report released by Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland warns. 

Sen. Bob Corker, the Republican chairman of the committee, didn’t sign on to the report. But even without formal GOP backing, the recounting of Russian operations in 19 European nations foreshadows the still-unpublished findings of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s bipartisan inquiry into Russia’s role during the U.S. election. 

Cardin said the roughly 200-page report is built on both Republican and Democratic ideas, and he commissioned it to show Americans the scope of efforts by Russian President Vladimir Putin to undermine democracy.

And yet Donald Trump does nothing.

Gee, it's almost as if he were working for the Putin agenda, instead of the American agenda.

But that can't be right, can it?

The FBI warned Donald Trump in the summer of 2016 that the Russians would try to infiltrate his campaign.

Courtesy of NBC News:  

In the weeks after he became the Republican nominee on July 19, 2016, Donald Trump was warned that foreign adversaries, including Russia, would probably try to spy on and infiltrate his campaign, according to multiple government officials familiar with the matter. 

The warning came in the form of a high-level counterintelligence briefing by senior FBI officials, the officials said. A similar briefing was given to Hillary Clinton, they added. They said the briefings, which are commonly provided to presidential nominees, were designed to educate the candidates and their top aides about potential threats from foreign spies. 

The candidates were urged to alert the FBI about any suspicious overtures to their campaigns, the officials said.

Seems pretty cut and dried don't you think?

If you see something, say something.

So did the Trump campaign do that ?

What do you think?

Trump would have been told, "If you see these kinds of contacts please let us know about them so we can keep you updated on the threat picture," said Frank Montoya, a former FBI counterintelligence agent and supervisor who retired in 2016. 

The situation was complicated by the fact that the FBI had already become aware of contacts between members of the Trump campaign and Russia, and was beginning to investigate further. Former CIA Director John Brennan has said he told the FBI about a pattern of contacts the CIA observed between members of the Trump team and Russians, and former FBI Director James Comey said the bureau then began investigating in July 2016. 

Montoya and other former FBI officials told NBC News the FBI would not have wanted to compromise that investigation by saying too much in the counterintelligence briefing of Trump. 

By the time of the warning in late July or August, at least seven Trump campaign officials had been in contact with Russians or people linked to Russia, according to public reports. There is no public evidence that the campaign reported any of that to the FBI.

This kind of puts all of the numerous meetings between the members of the Trump campaign and the Russians into an entirely new light.

They KNEW they were being targeted by the Russians, and instead of being cautious about any contacts with Russians connected to the Kremlin, they seemed to have been eager to meet with them multiple times.  

And now it appears that Trump is pushing to close the investigations down as soon as possible so that he can go back to being Putin's number one asset.

Courtesy of WaPo:

White House lawyers are expected to meet with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s office late this week seeking good news: that his sprawling investigation’s focus on President Trump will soon end and their client will be cleared. 

But people familiar with the probe say that such assurances are unlikely and that the meeting could trigger a new, more contentious phase between the special counsel and a frustrated president, according to administration officials and advisers close to Trump. 

People with knowledge of the investigation said it could last at least another year — pointing to ongoing cooperation from witnesses such as former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, as well as a possible trial of two former Trump campaign officials. The special counsel’s office has continued to request new documents related to the campaign, and members of Mueller’s team have told others they expect to be working through much of 2018, at a minimum. 

Yeah that meeting's definitely not going to go over well.

And I think Trump suspects as much which is why he has now shifted his focus away from Mueller and toward Mueller's boss.

Courtesy of The Hill:

President Trump has referred to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Robert Mueller as the special counsel for the Russia probe, as “a threat to his presidency,” according to a report in The Washington Post. 

The report, published Sunday, said Trump has referred to Rosenstein as “weak” and made fun of the deputy attorney general’s testimony last week in front of the House Judiciary Committee. 

The president has also complained about Rosenstein being “a Democrat," although the Justice Department official is actually a Republican, the Post said. 

So since Trump cannot fire Mueller directly, he will fire that guy who appointed him Special Counsel, and make that guy fire Mueller instead.

So I'm guessing that Trump has NOT watched "All the President's Men?"

Clearly Trump and his Kremlin handler want this thing to go away quickly so that they can continue dismantling America so that Russia can take its place as the new lone superpower in the world.

I mean let's face it, THAT is what is really happening here.

The Washington Post dives deep to explore Donald Trump's overwhelming desire to be Vladimir Putin's buddy and his skepticism concerning American intelligence.

The following is courtesy of WaPo.

Trump angrily resisted having to admit that the Russians hacked the DNC:

But as aides persisted, Trump became agitated. He railed that the intelligence couldn’t be trusted and scoffed at the suggestion that his candidacy had been propelled by forces other than his own strategy, message and charisma.

Told that members of his incoming Cabinet had already publicly backed the intelligence report on Russia, Trump shot back, “So what?” Admitting that the Kremlin had hacked Democratic Party emails, he said, was a “trap.” 

As Trump addressed journalists on Jan. 11 in the lobby of Trump Tower, he came as close as he ever would to grudging acceptance. “As far as hacking, I think it was Russia,” he said, adding that “we also get hacked by other countries and other people.” 

As hedged as those words were, Trump regretted them almost immediately. “It’s not me,” he said to aides afterward. “It wasn’t right.”

This has left America essentially defenseless against further Russian cyber attacks:  

Nearly a year into his presidency, Trump continues to reject the evidence that Russia waged an assault on a pillar of American democracy and supported his run for the White House. 

The result is without obvious parallel in U.S. history, a situation in which the personal insecurities of the president — and his refusal to accept what even many in his administration regard as objective reality — have impaired the government’s response to a national security threat. The repercussions radiate across the government. 

Rather than search for ways to deter Kremlin attacks or safeguard U.S. elections, Trump has waged his own campaign to discredit the case that Russia poses any threat and he has resisted or attempted to roll back efforts to hold Moscow to account.

In fact rather than look for ways to protect America and punish Russia for their interference, the Trump Administration has worked to  roll back some of the sanctions put in place by the Obama Administration and to resist the implementation of newer ones.

Trump also seems almost desperate to form an alliance with Putin and the Kremlin:  

Trump’s stance on the election is part of a broader entanglement with Moscow that has defined the first year of his presidency. He continues to pursue an elusive bond with Putin, which he sees as critical to dealing with North Korea, Iran and other issues. “Having Russia in a friendly posture,” he said last month, “is an asset to the world and an asset to our country.” 

His position has alienated close American allies and often undercut members of his Cabinet — all against the backdrop of a criminal probe into possible ties between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Overall the Kremlin is pleased with the results of their interference:   

Moscow has not achieved some its most narrow and immediate goals. The annexation of Crimea from Ukraine has not been recognized. Sanctions imposed for Russian intervention in Ukraine remain in place. Additional penalties have been mandated by Congress. And a wave of diplomatic retaliation has cost Russia access to additional diplomatic facilities, including its San Francisco consulate. 

But overall, U.S. officials said, the Kremlin believes it got a staggering return on an operation that by some estimates cost less than $500,000 to execute and was organized around two main objectives — destabilizing U.S. democracy and preventing Hillary Clinton, who is despised by Putin, from reaching the White House. 

The bottom line for Putin, said one U.S. official briefed on the stream of post-election intelligence, is that the operation was “more than worth the effort.”

“Putin has to believe this was the most successful intelligence operation in the history of Russian or Soviet intelligence,” said Andrew Weiss, a former adviser on Russia in the George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations who is now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “It has driven the American political system into a crisis that will last years.”

Well gee, isn't that great?

When it came time to sign the new Russian sanctions bill that the Congress overwhelmingly approved, Trump almost could not bring himself to do it:

In the final days before passage, Trump watched MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program and stewed as hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski declared that the bill would be a slap in the face to the president. “He was raging,” one adviser said. 

“He was raging mad.” 

After final passage, Trump was “apoplectic,” the adviser recalled. It took four days for aides to persuade him to sign the bill, arguing that if he vetoed it and Congress overturned that veto, his standing would be permanently weakened. 

“Hey, here are the votes,” aides told the president, according to a second Trump adviser. “If you veto it, they’ll override you and then you’re f---ed and you look like you’re weak.” 

Trump signed but made his displeasure known. His signing statement asserted that the measure included “clearly unconstitutional provisions.” Trump had routinely made a show of bill signings, but in this case no media was allowed to attend.

After the sanctions bill passed into law the Russian Prime Minister taunted Trump on Facebook, and called him "impotent," which of course only further angered Trump.

There is a lot more to the article, and I urge you to read it.

Once you finish I am sure you will agree with me that we desperately need to find a way to remove this asshole from office as soon as possible.

Russian hacker admitted in court that his team hacked the DNC under direction from the Kremlin.

Courtesy of Business Insider: 

A Russian hacker believed to be a member of a hacking collective called Lurk said in court over the summer that he was ordered by Russia's security services, known as the FSB, to hack the Democratic National Committee. 

The hacker, Konstantin Kozlovsky, told a Moscow court in August of this year that his nine-member hacking group — which has been accused of stealing over $17 million from Russia's largest financial institutions since 2013 — has been cooperating with the FSB for several years, according to the independent Russian news outlet The Bell. Part of that cooperation included hacking the DNC, he said. 

Kozlovsky said during a hearing on August 15 that he "performed various tasks under the supervision of FSB officers," including a DNC hack and cyberattacks on "very serious military enterprises of the United States and other organizations." Minutes from the hearing, as well as an audio recording, were posted on Kozlovsky's Facebook page. 

The Bell said it confirmed their authenticity with two sources, including a person who was present at the hearing. Kozlovsky also posted a letter that he wrote on November 1, 2016. The letter outlined what he said was his work for the FSB, which he said had spanned nearly a decade and, most recently, involved attacking the DNC servers.

Well so much for this story about Russians hacking our election being "fake news."

On that last point Politifact has now determined the denial that Russia interfered in our election to be the "Lie of the Year."

Well isn't that adorable, now Donald Trump and Sarah Palin have yet another thing in common.

Donald Trump kinda sorta tries to walk back his statement of belief in Vladimir Putin when he says he did not interfere in the 2016 election.

Courtesy of Reuters:  

At a news conference in Vietnam, Trump distanced himself from remarks he made on Saturday in which he suggested he believed Putin when he said there had been no Russian meddling in the election that took him to the White House. 

The comments had drawn criticism at home because U.S. intelligence agencies have long since concluded there was Russian meddling. 

“As to whether I believe it or not, I’m with our agencies, especially as currently constituted,” Trump said at a news conference with Vietnamese President Tran Dai Quang. 

“As currently led, by fine people, I believe very much in our intelligence agencies.”

Of course this only came after Trump was excoriated by folks like John McCain, Preet Bharara, and even his own CIA Director.

And you will notice he only wants to give credit to the current leaders of the intelligence agencies that HE appointed even though they are in total agreement with their predecessors.

However before anybody gives Trump a standing ovation for finally trusting his own intelligence agencies over a former KGB agent, you should probably hear this part as well: 

Trump said he still believed Putin did not think there had been Russian meddling. 

“I believe that President Putin really feels, and feels strongly, that he did not meddle in our election,” Trump said, while adding: “What he believes is what he believes.”

So Trump believes the intelligence agencies in that he think that the Russians influenced out elections, but not when they say it was directed by Vladimir Putin himself?

Or does he completely trust them but think that Putin suffers from some kind of split personality disorder, where there is a good Vlad, who only wants to repair Russia's relationship with America, and a bad Vlad, who wants to destroy western democracy everywhere in the world?

Because if you truly believe our American intelligence agencies, Putin not only interfered in our 2016 election, but interference directed at America and other western countries continues to this day.

For his part Putin also offered a few other denials as well yesterday.

Courtesy of The Hill:

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday denied any connections between his country and President Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, claiming that such ties are false rumors being propagated by the U.S. leader's political opponents. 

During a briefing at the conclusion of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Vietnam, Putin also dismissed reports that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross holds a stake in a company that does business with a Russian company with possible ties to the Russian president's son-in-law, according to multiple reports. 

I am just going to go ahead and assume that Trump is taking Putin's side on these allegations as well.

Saves time that way. 

On another somewhat related note Trump is now lobbing preschool insult at the leader of North Korea.

Why would Kim Jong-un insult me by calling me "old," when I would NEVER call him "short and fat?" Oh well, I try so hard to be his friend - and maybe someday that will happen!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 12, 2017

Every day, it just gets worse.  

During Asia summit Putin tells Trump once again he did not interfere in election, Trump seems to take his side over American intelligence agencies. Update!

The above video is from Russia TV.

Notice how Trump and Putin seemed to be joined at the hip?


Courtesy of CNBC:

"He says he didn't meddle. I asked him again. You can only ask so many times," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on the trip to Hanoi, Vietnam. "Every time he sees me, he said: 'I didn't do that.' And I believe, I really believe that when he tells me that he means it." 

Trump and Putin did not have a formal meeting while they were in Vietnam for an economic summit, but the two spoke informally several times and reached agreement on a number of principles for the future of war-torn Syria. But Trump made clear that the issue of Russian meddling in the election hovers over the leaders' relationship — Putin is "insulted" by the accusation, Trump said. In a blistering partisan attack, Trump accused Democrats of using the election issue to create a barrier between the U.S. and Russia as the nations work on crises in Syria and Ukraine. 

"Having a good relationship with Russia's a great, great thing. And this artificial Democratic hit job gets in the way," Trump told reporters, once again casting doubt on the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia did try to interfere in the election. "People will die because of it."

You know to me this simply reinforces the idea that Trump knew all along that the Russians were interfering in our election, and was very likely helping them to do it.

Why else take the word of a former KGB agent over the word of our own intelligence agencies?

Here’s the *key* quote from Trump on Putin re: Russian election meddling:
“Every time he sees me he says, 'I didn't do that,' and I believe, I really believe that when he tells me that, he means it.” pic.twitter.com/kLrx2pNLIf

— Peter Alexander (@PeterAlexander) November 11, 2017

And to call the work by our intelligence agencies, an the Mueller investigation, a "Democratic hit job" is essentially the talk of a traitor.

Update: Well this is kind of an interesting twist. 

Trump and Putin spox Dmitry Peskov are telling 2 different stories -- Trump says they discussed Russian meddling, Peskov says the subject didn't even come up https://t.co/YnuSlenPa8

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) November 11, 2017

So who do we believe?

The Russians who lie to the American media all of the time, or Donald Trump who lies to the American media all of the time?

Rachel Maddow does a deep dive into Russian interference around the world.

I wanted to share this with you this morning because when I watched it last night I was blown away by how clearly Maddow ties all of the threads together.

Maddow connects the dots between the invasion of Ukraine and the Facebook ads which caused such divisiveness in 2016, to Russia's long term goal of disrupting democracy around the world.

Facebook clearly has a lot to answer for, and in response to these reports they may be forced to significantly alter their business model.

Now I know that there is at least one of you who will be unable to follow Rachel as she uses multi syllable grown up words and uses hand gestures while making a point.

For you there are handy subtitles included to help you understand what Maddow is saying.

If you still find yourself confused then I guess you can always turn your TV to Fox News and let that ignorance wash over you cleansing your palate.

But for the rest of us, pay very close attention to what she is saying. And then spread it far and wide.

Russia, who just used Facebook to help undermine our democracy, wants to make sure they have control over it in their country. Update!

Courtesy of the Los Angeles Times:

In its latest attempt to wrest control of the internet, Russia's communications agency has threatened to block access to Facebook if the company refuses to store its data locally. 

Alexander Zharov, chief of the Federal Communications Agency, told Russian news agencies Tuesday that they will work to “make Facebook comply with the law” on personal data, which obliges foreign companies to store it in Russia. Critics have slammed the law, which took effect in 2015, for potentially exposing the data to Russian intelligence agencies. 

Zharov said that the Russian government understands Facebook is a “unique service” but that it will not make exceptions and will have to block it next year if Facebook does not comply. 

Last year, Russia blocked business-focused social network LinkedIn after a court ruled it violated the law on data storage. LinkedIn is available in Russia only if accessed via proxy servers.

Sounds like Facebook wants to maintain control over who uses Facebook, and how they use it in their country.

In other news this is how Russia used the social platform to manipulate OUR fellow citizens.

Courtesy of WaPo:   

The batch of more than 3,000 Russian-bought ads that Facebook is preparing to turn over to Congress shows a deep understanding of social divides in American society, with some ads promoting African American rights groups, including Black Lives Matter, and others suggesting that these same groups pose a rising political threat, say people familiar with the covert influence campaign. 

The Russian campaign — taking advantage of Facebook’s ability to send contrary messages to different groups of users based on their political and demographic characteristics — also sought to sow discord among religious groups. Other ads highlighted support for Democrat Hillary Clinton among Muslim women. 

These targeted messages, along with others that have surfaced in recent days, highlight the sophistication of an influence campaign slickly crafted to mimic and infiltrate U.S. political discourse while also seeking to heighten tensions between groups already wary of one another.

Clearly the Kremlin understands the potential power of Facebook, having used it against us, and they do not want anybody else to have that power to manipulate them as well.

On the one hand that is smart.

On the other hand, fuck these guys.

I think Facebook should not only allow themselves to be banned in Russia, but also only allow Russians who have been thoroughly vetted, and DON'T have any ties to the Kremlin, use Facebook.

Update: Politico has more on who was targeted:

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein was the beneficiary of at least one of the Russian-bought political ads on Facebook that federal government officials suspect were intended to influence the 2016 election. 

Other advertisements paid for by shadowy Russian buyers criticized Hillary Clinton and promoted Donald Trump. Some backed Bernie Sanders and his platform even after his presidential campaign had ended, according to a person with knowledge of the ads.

The pro-Stein ad came late in the political campaign and pushed her candidacy for president, this person said. 

“Choose peace and vote for Jill Stein,” the ad reads. “Trust me. It’s not a wasted vote. … The only way to take our country back is to stop voting for the corporations and banks that own us. #GrowaSpineVoteJillStein.” 

The ads show a complicated effort that didn’t necessarily hew to promoting Trump and bashing Clinton. Instead, they show a desire to create divisions while sometimes praising Trump, Sanders and Stein. A number of the ads seemed to question Clinton’s authenticity and tout some of the liberal criticisms of her candidacy.

As I have stated before, if you did not vote for Hillary Clinton there is a strong possibility that the Kremlin made you their little bitch. 

FBI now turns its attention to Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik to examine its part in the 2016 election.

Courtesy of Yahoo News: 

The FBI recently questioned a former White House correspondent for Sputnik, the Russian-government-funded news agency, as part of an investigation into whether it is acting as an undeclared propaganda arm of the Kremlin in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). 

As part of the probe, Yahoo News has learned, the bureau has obtained a thumb drive containing thousands of internal Sputnik emails and documents — material that could potentially help prosecutors build a case that the news agency played a role in the Russian government “influence campaign” that was waged during last year’s presidential election and, in the view of U.S. intelligence officials, is still ongoing. 

The emails were turned over by Andrew Feinberg, the news agency’s former White House correspondent, who had downloaded the material onto his laptop before he was fired in May. He confirmed to Yahoo News that he was questioned for more than two hours on Sept. 1 by an FBI agent and a Justice Department national security lawyer at the bureau’s Washington field office. 

Feinberg said the interview was focused on Sputnik’s “internal structure, editorial processes and funding.” “They wanted to know where did my orders come from and if I ever got any direction from Moscow,” Feinberg told Yahoo News. 

“They were interested in examples of how I was steered towards covering certain issues.” 

It is not clear whether the agent and prosecutor who questioned Feinberg were acting as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s broader investigation into Russian efforts to disrupt the 2016 election and possible links to the Trump campaign. “We are not confirming whether specific matters are or are not part of our ongoing investigation,” a spokesman for Mueller emailed. A spokesman for the Justice Department declined to comment, and the FBI did not respond to questions. 

But the inquiry comes at a time when members of Congress and others have pushed the Justice Department to strengthen its enforcement of the FARA, especially as it relates to the operations in Washington of two Russian news organizations, Sputnik and RT (formerly known as Russia Today). 

“This is incredibly significant,” said Asha Rangappa, a former FBI counterintelligence agent and now an associate dean of Yale Law School, about the bureau’s questioning of the former Sputnik reporter. “The FBI has since the 1970s taken pains not to be perceived in any way as infringing on First Amendment activity. But this tells me they have good information and intelligence that these organizations have been acting on behalf of the Kremlin and that there’s a direct line between them and the [Russian influence operations] that are a significant threat to our democracy.” 

Okay well this is great news. 

And the fact they got their hands on internal e-mails is especially delicious.

I also hope that at least one of these ongoing investigations has their sites set on Russia Today, as that was where the majority of links attacking Hillary and promoting Bernie Sanders that showed up here on IM originated.

I actually stopped allowing links to either RT or Sputnik fairly early on in the process, once I identified the patterns.

I just wish Facebook at Twitter had done the same. 

Russian interference in our 2016 election may be more widespread than previously reported.

Courtesy of the New York Times: 

The calls started flooding in from hundreds of irate North Carolina voters just after 7 a.m. on Election Day last November. 

Dozens were told they were ineligible to vote and were turned away at the polls, even when they displayed current registration cards. Others were sent from one polling place to another, only to be rejected. Scores of voters were incorrectly told they had cast ballots days earlier. In one precinct, voting halted for two hours. 

Susan Greenhalgh, a troubleshooter at a nonpartisan election monitoring group, was alarmed. Most of the complaints came from Durham, a blue-leaning county in a swing state. The problems involved electronic poll books — tablets and laptops, loaded with check-in software, that have increasingly replaced the thick binders of paper used to verify voters’ identities and registration status. She knew that the company that provided Durham’s software, VR Systems, had been penetrated by Russian hackers months before. 

“It felt like tampering, or some kind of cyberattack,” Ms. Greenhalgh said about the voting troubles in Durham.

Durham was certainly not the only areas to experience these complications, but without a forensic analysis we may never know exactly how widespread they were or who orchestrated the difficulties.

Intelligence officials in January reassured Americans that there was no indication that Russian hackers had altered the vote count on Election Day, the bottom-line outcome. But the assurances stopped there. 

Government officials said that they intentionally did not address the security of the back-end election systems, whose disruption could prevent voters from even casting ballots. 

That’s partly because states control elections; they have fewer resources than the federal government but have long been loath to allow even cursory federal intrusions into the voting process. 

That, along with legal constraints on intelligence agencies’ involvement in domestic issues, has hobbled any broad examination of Russian efforts to compromise American election systems. Those attempts include combing through voter databases, scanning for vulnerabilities or seeking to alter data, which have been identified in multiple states. Current congressional inquiries and the special counsel’s Russia investigation have not focused on the matter. 

“We don’t know if any of the problems were an accident, or the random problems you get with computer systems, or whether it was a local hacker, or actual malfeasance by a sovereign nation-state,” said Michael Daniel, who served as the cybersecurity coordinator in the Obama White House. “If you really want to know what happened, you’d have to do a lot of forensics, a lot of research and investigation, and you may not find out even then.”

Of course with Trump in the White House and Republican majorities in both the House and the Senate there appears to be no burning desire to get to the bottom of what caused this interference.

And why would there be?

After all if it helped to put a Republican in the White House and to help the Republicans maintain a majority in both houses, why would they want to find a problem? 

However if these issues are not addressed how can the American people trust the election results ever again?

Special Counsel Robert Mueller impanels Grand Jury to investigate Russia's interference in 2016 election. This is big!

Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal: 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller has impaneled a grand jury in Washington to investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections, a sign that his inquiry is growing in intensity and entering a new phase, according to people familiar with the matter. 

The grand jury, which began its work in recent weeks, signals that Mr. Mueller’s inquiry will likely continue for months. Mr. Mueller is investigating Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 election and whether President Donald Trump’s campaign or associates colluded with the Kremlin as part of that effort.

Grand juries are powerful investigative tools that allow prosecutors to subpoena documents, put witnesses under oath and seek indictments, if there is evidence of a crime. Legal experts said that the decision by Mr. Mueller to impanel a grand jury suggests he believes he will need to subpoena records and take testimony from witnesses. 

“This is yet a further sign that there is a long-term, large-scale series of prosecutions being contemplated and being pursued by the special counsel,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas. “If there was already a grand jury in Alexandria looking at Flynn, there would be no need to reinvent the wheel for the same guy. This suggests that the investigation is bigger and wider than Flynn, perhaps substantially so.” 

As I texted back to my friend earlier today, shit just got real!

According to this Wall Street Journal article Mueller did NOT simply use an already existing Grand Jury for this investigation, he impaneled his own specifically focused on the Russia probe.

Also keep in mind that when appearing before a Grand Jury witnesses and defendants are not allowed to bring their lawyers in with them. Which means that the risk of perjury is very high.

Now keep in mind the folks that are likely to be called before this Grand Jury, and their difficult relationship with telling the truth.

I think that if Trump was seriously considering the idea of firing Robert Mueller that it is too late for that now, especially now that there are Senators introducing a bipartisan bill to protect his investigation.

The horse is already out of the barn, as my father might say.

Donald Trump finally, begrudgingly, signs Russia sanction bill into law.

Fine, I'll sign it. But I am not happy about it.

Courtesy of NPR:  

After being approved by overwhelming majorities in Congress, President Trump begrudgingly signed into law new sanctions against Russia on Wednesday. The move is in contrast with his frequently stated desire to improve relations with the country. The president also issued a signing statement where he declared that the legislation has a number of what he deems to be "unconstitutional provisions." 

The sanctions bill targets Russia's mining and oil industry, and aims to punish the country for interfering in the 2016 presidential election as well for its military aggression in Ukraine. In announcing that he'd signed the bill, Trump made his most definitive statement yet about Russia's interference in last U.S. presidential election. 

"I also support making clear that America will not tolerate interference in our democratic process, and that we will side with our allies and friends against Russian subversion and destabilization," he said. 

He also made clear however, that he has a number of qualms with the "seriously flawed" bill. Most notably, with the fact that it restricts his ability to ease sanctions without Congress' involvement. To waive sanctions, Trump has to send Congress a report explaining and justifying his decision, and lawmakers would then get 30 days to decide whether to allow the waiver. 

"The bill remains seriously flawed — particularly because it encroaches on the executive branch's authority to negotiate," Trump said, adding "The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President. This bill will prove the wisdom of that choice."

Yes, well the framers may not have anticipated that there would someday be a president who was working as a double agent for an American adversary.

Perhaps the most important part of this bill is not the sanctions it places on Russia, but the sanctions that it places on Donald Trump's ability to undermine it.

That's right, the man living in the White House, "a real dump," has to be treated as a potential enemy of the state.

Apparently Trump was so upset about having to sign this bill that he would not even let the media cover it.

.@realDonaldTrump has signed Russia sanctions bill despite reservations given veto-proof majority had no choice no coverage permitted

— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) August 2, 2017

Probably did not want them to catch him sobbing.

In defiance of Donald Trump Congress crafts bill which places tough new sanctions on Russia for interfering in our election, and military aggression.

Courtesy of the New York Times:

Congressional leaders have reached an agreement on sweeping sanctions legislation to punish Russia for its election meddling and aggression toward its neighbors, they said Saturday, defying the White House’s argument that President Trump needs flexibility to adjust the sanctions to fit his diplomatic initiatives with Moscow. 

The new legislation sharply limits the president’s ability to suspend or terminate the sanctions — a remarkable handcuffing by a Republican-led Congress six months into Mr. Trump’s tenure. It is also the latest Russia-tinged turn for a presidency consumed by investigations into the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russian officials last year. 

Mr. Trump could soon face a decision: veto the bill — a move that would fuel accusations that he is doing the bidding of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia — or sign legislation imposing sanctions his administration abhors. 

“A nearly united Congress is poised to send President Putin a clear message on behalf of the American people and our allies, and we need President Trump to help us deliver that message,” said Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The White House had argued that such strict sanctions would hamper Trump's ability to negotiate with Vladimir Putin.

The House did not seem to give a shit about that.

The House version of the bill includes a small number of changes, technical and substantive, from the Senate legislation, including some made in response to concerns raised by oil and gas companies. 

But for the most part, the Republican leadership appears to have rejected most of the White House’s objections. The bill aims to punish Russia not only for interference in the election but also for its annexation of Crimea, continuing military activity in eastern Ukraine and human rights abuses. Proponents of the measure seek to impose sanctions on people involved in human rights abuses, suppliers of weapons to the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria and those undermining cybersecurity, among others.

The ball will now be in Trump's court. He can sign the bill and piss off his puppet master, or veto the bill and remove any doubt that he is working for the Kremlin. 

So does the Constitution have a provision to deal with a fraudulent presidential election? The short answer is "no."

Courtesy of FiveThirtyEight:  

For all the headlines about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, no hard evidence has come to light, at least publicly, showing that President Trump or his team were involved. But suppose that such evidence did come to light — what would happen if it became clear that Trump or his advisers colluded with the Russians?1 This isn’t the only type of wrongdoing the investigations could uncover, but it’s among the most serious because it would cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2016 result. So, is there a process for dealing with a finding that in essence invalidates an election? 

When it comes to presidential elections, the answer is: not really. The laws and processes around national elections have grown up in a piecemeal fashion over time, with state and local laws governing the administration of presidential elections. And the Constitution itself focuses more on ensuring stability than on administering elections. As a result, there aren’t clear procedures for how to handle questions of legitimacy after the fact — especially when those questions involve the presidency.

FiveThirtyEight dives deep into the whys and why nots, that the framers of the Constitution took into consideration when creating the document that is at the heart of our democracy.

However for the purposes of this post I will skip all of that detail and just get to the rather disappointing punchline:

In most of the historical cases, the main question was how the Electoral College votes would be allocated in each state. Once those have been cast, the case for questioning a presidential election or gauging which side really won becomes a lot more difficult. Of course, the Constitution does have one mechanism for undoing the results of an election: impeachment. That process, however, is focused on individual wrongdoing (or, through a separate process, inability), not electoral irregularities. In that sense, even if collusion revelations did lead to Trump’s impeachment and removal from office, the process wouldn’t really address the question of whether his election had been legitimate in the first place. 

The lack of an established process for reviewing elections points to a larger issue: The structures established by the Constitution assumed a world in which the presidency and the Electoral College were not fully absorbed into a contentious national party system. That vision has long since been replaced by one in which presidential elections are national contests over policy agendas and ideas. The text of our Constitution has never been changed to reflect this reality. Instead, the Electoral College remains the final word on who gets to be president. When it comes to the possibility that the winning side colluded with a foreign power to influence the election outcome, the Constitution doesn’t offer much in the way of a plan.

This is probably something that Vladimir Putin understood better than your average voter.

There are no do overs in presidential politics.

Once into the Oval Office a bad president can be like an intestinal parasite latching on firmly, too far out of reach for easy removal.

Perhaps we can impeach Donald Trump, that does not mean that we can replace him with anyone better, or that we can stop the destructive policy decisions that he and the Republicans are putting in place as we  speak.

We often hear that elections have consequences, and perhaps that has never been more true than the election of 2016.

New reports suggest that Vladimir Putin was directly involved in attacking our democracy, and that the Russian cyber attacks were quite successful.

Courtesy of WaPo: 

Early last August, an envelope with extraordinary handling restrictions arrived at the White House. Sent by courier from the CIA, it carried “eyes only” instructions that its contents be shown to just four people: President Barack Obama and three senior aides. 

Inside was an intelligence bombshell, a report drawn from sourcing deep inside the Russian government that detailed Russian President Vladi­mir Putin’s direct involvement in a cyber campaign to disrupt and discredit the U.S. presidential race. 

But it went further. The intelligence captured Putin’s specific instructions on the operation’s audacious objectives — defeat or at least damage the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, and help elect her opponent, Donald Trump. 

At that point, the outlines of the Russian assault on the U.S. election were increasingly apparent. Hackers with ties to Russian intelligence services had been rummaging through Democratic Party computer networks, as well as some Republican systems, for more than a year. In July, the FBI had opened an investigation of contacts between Russian officials and Trump associates. And on July 22, nearly 20,000 emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee were dumped online by WikiLeaks.

So as you can see the Obama Administration knew almost immediately that the attacks were directed by Putin, and that they were designed to not only damage Hillary's chances of winning the election but to directly help Trump emerge as the victor.

The article goes into great depth about all of the conversations that went on behind the scenes as to how best to respond to this information but in the end it came down to Obama warning Putin directly to back off, and to release a declassified report to the public about the hacks before the election.

Obama also deported 35 Russian diplomats, closed two compounds, and approved the implantation of cyber weapons into the Russian computer system that can be activated at a later date if Russia continues these attacks on our democracy.

The only problem with those cyber weapons is that it is up to Donald Trump to utilize, or not utilize them, and of course we know what his choice will be.

The article goes on to call this attack the "crime of the century," and I find that to be a completely accurate statement.

Here is an article from Time Magazine to tell us just how accurate it is:  

The hacking of state and local election databases in 2016 was more extensive than previously reported, including at least one successful attempt to alter voter information, and the theft of thousands of voter records that contain private information like partial Social Security numbers, current and former officials tell TIME. 

In one case, investigators found there had been a manipulation of voter data in a county database but the alterations were discovered and rectified, two sources familiar with the matter tell TIME. Investigators have not identified whether the hackers in that case were Russian agents. 

The fact that private data was stolen from states is separately providing investigators a previously unreported line of inquiry in the probes into Russian attempts to influence the election. In Illinois, more than 90% of the nearly 90,000 records stolen by Russian state actors contained drivers license numbers, and a quarter contained the last four digits of voters’ Social Security numbers, according to Ken Menzel, the General Counsel of the State Board of Elections. 

And get this:

Congressional investigators are probing whether any of this stolen private information made its way to the Trump campaign, two sources familiar with the investigations tell TIME.

I think we already know what that probe will find if it is not obstructed by the Trump Administration.

The White House by the way has FINALLY acknowledged that the Russians interfered in our election.  Well kinda: 

The White House Thursday addressed the joint intelligence report that found Russia had attempted to interfere with the 2016 presidential election, more than five months after the report’s conclusions were made public. First, on Twitter, President Trump dismissed the concerns about Russia as a “big Dem HOAX” and suggested that his predecessor, President Barack Obama, did little to confront the problem. White House aides then clarified Trump’s remarks and said he believes there was Russian meddling but is certain it did not affect the outcome of the race.

I think we are all learning that the last part of this statement is likely untrue.

As for that allegation that President Obama did not do all that he could to "confront the problem" I disagree completely. 

I think the President was in an untenable position and knew full well that if he came out aggressively to say that the Russians were trying to get Trump elected and revealed all of their methods for pulling that off, the folks supporting Trump would never have believed him, and if by some chance Hillary had pulled off a victory her presidency would have been forever tainted by what would have been seen as interference by the Executive branch.

No he did all that he could really do, but in the end Vladimir Putin decided who would sit in the Oval Office.

All we can do is help determine for how long.

More evidence that the Russian hack was more invasive than previously reported.

Courtesy of Bloomberg: 

Russia’s cyberattack on the U.S. electoral system before Donald Trump’s election was far more widespread than has been publicly revealed, including incursions into voter databases and software systems in almost twice as many states as previously reported. 

In Illinois, investigators found evidence that cyber intruders tried to delete or alter voter data. The hackers accessed software designed to be used by poll workers on Election Day, and in at least one state accessed a campaign finance database. Details of the wave of attacks, in the summer and fall of 2016, were provided by three people with direct knowledge of the U.S. investigation into the matter. In all, the Russian hackers hit systems in a total of 39 states, one of them said.

The new details, buttressed by a classified National Security Agency document recently disclosed by the Intercept, show the scope of alleged hacking that federal investigators are scrutinizing as they look into whether Trump campaign officials may have colluded in the efforts. But they also paint a worrisome picture for future elections: The newest portrayal of potentially deep vulnerabilities in the U.S.’s patchwork of voting technologies comes less than a week after former FBI Director James Comey warned Congress that Moscow isn’t done meddling. 

“They’re coming after America,” Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee investigating Russian interference in the election. “They will be back.”

Thirty nine states is significantly more than we were told about before.

Which makes me concerned that there is still more to be uncovered about these hacks and how deeply they actually reached into out election system.

Check how deeply they were able to penetrate in to Illinois' voting systems:

Illinois, which was among the states that gave the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security almost full access to investigate its systems, provides a window into the hackers’ successes and failures. 

In early July 2016, a contractor who works two or three days a week at the state board of elections detected unauthorized data leaving the network, according to Ken Menzel, general counsel for the Illinois board of elections. The hackers had gained access to the state’s voter database, which contained information such as names, dates of birth, genders, driver’s licenses and partial Social Security numbers on 15 million people, half of whom were active voters. As many as 90,000 records were ultimately compromised. 

But even if the entire database had been deleted, it might not have affected the election, according to Menzel. Counties upload records to the state, not the other way around, and no data moves from the database back to the counties, which run the elections. 

The hackers had no way of knowing that when they attacked the state database, Menzel said. The state does, however, process online voter registration applications that are sent to the counties for approval, Menzel said. When voters are added to the county rolls, that information is then sent back to the state and added to the central database. This process, which is common across states, does present an opportunity for attackers to manipulate records at their inception.

This could have allowed the hackers to change the voter registration to be affiliated with another party, or changed their home address so that they were shown to no longer living in their voting district. 

It only takes a few manipulations to invalidate a person's vote, or frustrate them into giving up the attempt. 

The only thing I can take away from such a huge and determined operation is that Putin REALLY did not want Hillary Clinton to win the election, or else he REALLY wanted Trump to emerge victorious, or perhaps a combination of the two.

This is simply not like any other attempts that we have heard of in the past.