—
It should be a “drinking game” — every time someone at the RNC says “Russian Hoax” …
Then again, who wants to waste all those brain cells?
— —
Here’s another look at that so-called “Russian Hoax” — searching on the Keywords: “Wikileaks” and then “Kilimnik”. It seems this bipartisan Senate Report does NOT lend any credence to the Trump-claim of a “Russian Hoax,” regarding the activities leading up to Trump’s win in 2016.
—
READ: Senate Intelligence panel's fifth volume of Russia investigation report
CNN — August 18, 2020
PDFs of Vol. 1-5
www.intelligence.senate.gov
This is PDF of Vol. 5 from last week’s report:
www.intelligence.senate.gov
[Emphasis added]
[vii]
The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the Russian effort to hack computer networks and accounts affiliated with the Democratic Party and leak information damaging to Hillary Clinton and her campaign for president. Moscow's intent was to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the U.S. democratic process.
WikiLeaks actively sought, and played, a key role in the Russian influence likely knew it was assisting a Russian intelligence influence effort. The Committee found significant indications that [REDACTED]. At the time of the first WikiLeaks releases, the U.S. Government had not yet declared WikiLeaks a hostile organization and many treated it as a journalistic entity.
While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump's electoral prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases, created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following their release, and encouraged further leaks. The Trump Campaign publicly undermined the attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia and was indifferent to whether it and WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.
[170]
Beginning in March 2016, officers of the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate, the GRU, successfully hacked computer networks belonging to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), and the email accounts of Clinton Campaign officials and employees, including Campaign Chairman. John Podesta. Over the following months, these hackers carefully established persistent access in confidential areas of the victims' systems and stole massive amounts of politically sensitive data and personal communications. The data was subsequently leaked by GRU personas and WikiLeaks at strategic moments during the 2016 election, as part of a coordinated hack-and-leak operation intended to damage the Clinton Campaign, help the Trump Campaign (the "Campaign"), and undermine the U.S. democratic process.[1110 ]
[...]
The Committee found that Russian President Vladimir Putin directed the hack-and-leak campaign targeting the DNC, DCCC, and the Clinton Campaign. Moscow's intent was to damage the Clinton Campaign and tarnish what it expected might be a Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and generally undermine the U.S. democratic process. The Committee's findings are based on a variety of information, including raw intelligence reporting.
[172]
The GRU transferred the information stolen from the Clinton Campaign and DNC to WikiLeaks, likely because WikiLeaks offered a more effective platform to disseminate stolen documents than the GRU's own organic methods. The GRU communicated with WikiLeaks using its fake personas throughout the summer of 2016. It transferred data to WikiLeaks through electronic means, and may also have transferred data to WikiLeaks through human couriers.
[...]
While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those materials to aid Trump's electoral prospects. To do so, the Trump Campaign took actions to obtain advance notice about WikiLeaks releases of Clinton emails; took steps to obtain inside information about the content of releases once WikiLeaks began to publish stolen information; created messaging strategies to promote and share the materials in anticipation of and following their release; and encouraged further theft of information and continued leaks.
Trump and senior Campaign officials sought to obtain advance information about WikiLeaks through Roger Stone. In spring 2016, prior to Assange's public announcements, Stone advised the Campaign that WikiLeaks would be releasing materials harmful to Clinton. Following the July 22 DNC release, Trump and the Campaign believed that Roger Stone had known of the release and had inside access to WikiLeaks, and repeatedly communicated with Stone about WikiLeaks throughout the summer and fall of 2016. Trump and other senior Campaign officials specifically directed Stone to obtain information about upcoming document releases relating to Clinton and report back. At their direction, Stone took action to gain inside knowledge for the Campaign and shared his purported knowledge directly with Trump and senior Campaign officials on multiple occasions. Trump and the Campaign believed that Stone had inside information and expressed satisfaction that Stone's information suggested more releases would be forthcoming.
[173]
Obtaining Clinton-related emails was a primary focus of the Trump Campaign's opposition research effort. While it was seeking advance information about potential WikiLeaks releases, the Campaign created a messaging strategy to promote the stolen materials. When the hacked emails were released, the Campaign used the contents of the emails to attack Clinton. In addition, Trump publicly requested that Russia find and release the "missing" emails from Clinton's server, and hours later, GRU hackers attempted new spearphishing attacks against the Clinton Campaign. Trump also directed individuals in, and associated with, his Campaign to seek out Clinton's "missing" emails.[1114]
Trump and the Campaign continued to promote and disseminate the hacked WikiLeaks documents, even after the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security released a joint statement officially attributing the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia as part of its interference in the U.S. presidential election. The Trump Campaign publicly undermined the attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia, and was indifferent to whether it and WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.
— —
[vi]
Paul Manafort's connections to Russia and Ukraine began in approximately late 2004 with the start of his work for Oleg Deripaska and other Russia-aligned oligarchs in Ukraine. The Committee found that Deripaska conducts influence operations, frequently in countries where he has a significant economic interest. The Russian government coordinates with and directs Deripaska on many of his influence operations.
From approximately 2004 to 2009, Manafort implemented these influence operations on behalf of Deripaska, including a broad, multi-million dollar political influence campaign directed at numerous countries of interest to Deripaska and the Russian government. Pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarchs with deep economic ties to Russia also paid Manafort tens of millions of dollars and formed strong ties with Manafort independent of Deripaska.
Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik became an integral part of Manafort's operations in Ukraine and Russia, serving as Manafort's primary liaison to Deripaska and eventually managing Manafort's office in Kyiv. Kilimnik and Manafort formed a close and lasting relationship that endured to the 2016 U.S. elections and beyond.
Prior to joining the Trump Campaign in March 2016 and continuing throughout his time on the Campaign, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska, and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine. On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik. The Committee was unable to reliably determine why Manafort shared sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy with Kilimnik or with whom Kilimnik further shared that information.
[...]
[28]
On numerous occasions over the course of his time on the Trump Campaign, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik. Gates, who served as Manafort' s deputy on the Campaign, aided Manafort in this effort. Manafort communicated electronically with Kilimnik and met Kilimnik in person twice while serving on the Trump Campaign. Manafort briefed Kilimnik on sensitive Campaign polling data and the Campaign's strategy for beating Hiliary Clinton. At Manafort's direction, Gates used an encrypted messaging application to send additional Campaign polling data to Kilimnik.
Manafort also discussed with Kilimnik a peace plan for eastern Ukraine that benefited the·Kremlin. At Yanukovych's direction, Kilimnik sought Manafort's assistance with the plan. Manafort continued to work with Kilimnik on the plan until at least early 2018.
[...]
The Committee obtained some information suggesting Kilimnik may have been connected to the GRU's hack and leak operation targeting the 2016 U.S. election.
• [REDACTED]
• [REDACTED]
• [REDACTED]
• [REDACTED]
[REDACTED] While this information suggests that a channel for coordination on the GRU hack-and-leak operation may have existed through Kilimnik, the Committee had limited insight into Kilimnik' s communications with Manafort and [REDACTED], all of whom used sophisticated communications security practices.
[REDACTED] After the election, Manafort continued to coordinate with Russian persons, particularly Kilimnik and other individuals close to Deripaska, in an effort to undertake activities on their behalf. After Kilimnik arranged the meeting, Manafort met in Spain with another to Deripaska aide who was also tied to [REDACTED] Manafort also met secretly with Kilimnik in the United States and Spain in early 2017.
… Of course Manafort had a vested interest in doing Putin’s bidding …
Secret Ledger in Ukraine Lists Cash for Donald Trump’s Campaign Chief
by Andrew E. Kramer, Mike McIntire and Barry Meier, NYTimes — Aug. 14, 2016
[...]
The papers, known in Ukraine as the “black ledger,” are a chicken-scratch of Cyrillic covering about 400 pages taken from books once kept in a third-floor room in the former Party of Regions headquarters on Lipskaya Street in Kiev. The room held two safes stuffed with $100 bills, said Taras V. Chornovil, a former party leader who was also a recipient of the money at times. He said in an interview that he had once received $10,000 in a “wad of cash” for a trip to Europe.
A page from the “black ledger,” released by Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau. This page does not include Mr. Manafort’s name.
“This was our cash,” he said, adding that he had left the party in part over concerns about off-the-books activity. “They had it on the table, stacks of money, and they had lists of who to pay.”
The National Anti-Corruption Bureau, which obtained the ledger, said in a statement that Mr. Manafort’s name appeared 22 times in the documents over five years, with payments totaling $12.7 million. The purpose of the payments is not clear. Nor is the outcome, since the handwritten entries cannot be cross-referenced against banking records, and the signatures for receipt have not yet been verified.
Manafort claimed innocence when that news broke 4 years ago, straining all credulity at the time.
Trump ultimately praised Manafort for “refusing to break” under Federal investigators … 2 years later:
President Trump on Wednesday praised his just-convicted former campaign chairman for refusing to “break” and cooperate with federal prosecutors investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, expressing appreciation for the personal loyalty of a felon found guilty of defrauding the United States government.
In a series of tweets the morning after an extraordinary day in which Paul Manafort, his former campaign chief, was convicted of tax and bank fraud and his longtime personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations he said were directed by Mr. Trump, the president appeared to suggest he was more concerned with the fallout for himself than with the crimes.
He compared Mr. Cohen unfavorably with Mr. Manafort, attacking Mr. Cohen as a bad lawyer who had caved to pressure from biased federal prosecutors while lauding Mr. Manafort as a “brave man” with a “wonderful family” who had stood strong.
“‘Justice’ took a 12 year old tax case, among other things, applied tremendous pressure on him and, unlike Michael Cohen, he refused to ‘break’ — make up stories in order to get a ‘deal,’” Mr. Trump wrote, his quotation marks suggesting his disdain for the Justice Department.
www.nytimes.com — Aug 22, 2018
— —
In summary:
You know how-many times words “Russian Hoax” occurs in that 952-page Senate Report?
.
.
.
Exactly 0 times.
Like I said before, this bipartisan Senate Report does NOT lend any credence to the Trump-claim of a “Russian Hoax,” regarding the activities leading up to Trump’s win in 2016.
It kind of does the opposite, as a matter of fact. It kind of proves Trump-Russia Collusion did occur.
It no doubt, will occur again. …. What’s to stop it, exactly?
...
Bill Barr is the leading proponent of it — just wait for his Durham Report to drop, Octoberish. It will be based on the tainted words of pro-Russian politicians, with a Putin-foothold in Ukraine. Garnished with the lunacy raving of Rudolph Giuliani.
It seems the GRU influence-campaigns never sleep. … Neither should we.
— —
RNC Motto: Make America Putin's Poodle again.
GRU’s long-term plan for America: Rust out our institutions. Cuz like them, rust never sleeps either.
