Russian interference with the 2016 election

[Juvenal]

Russian interference is a moving target. To get up to speed, here's a live stream from last night, which also serves to put some faces to the bylines responsible for much of the in-depth reporting out of the Times.

Russia and the 2016 Election: What Lines Were Crossed?

Panelists, from left to right:

Scott Shane, New York Times
Nina Khrushcheva, Professor of International Affairs, The New School
Michael S. Schmidt, New York Times
Mark Mazzetti, Washington Investigations Editor, New York Times

As we have some newbs around here, please note this is a lao tzu thread: Robust responses are welcome, carefully considered responses are more than welcome, but all responses should be directed toward the posts, not the posters.

[Juvenal]

Alternatively, current and historical reporting is available at:

Russian Hacking and Influence in the U.S. Election

[Sparko]

The left likes to blame "Russian hackers" and "Russian twitter bots" whenever anything doesn't go the way they like. It is their scapegoat. And it is getting old. It has become the left's "crying wolf"

[Mountain Man]

These are the same liberals who had no problem whatsoever with Obama openly campaigning against Netanyahu in Israel's election. They're just crying now because they didn't get the result they wanted.

Also, when Wray was recently asked if Christopher Steele was indirectly working for Putin, he refused to answer in the open hearing, saying that the information was classified. Which basically means yes.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018...-answer-video/

Funny how the evidence for collusion keeps leading us away from Trump and to the Democrats.

[One Bad Pig]

These are the same liberals who had no problem whatsoever with Obama openly campaigning against Netanyahu in Israel's election. They're just crying now because they didn't get the result they wanted.

Also, when Wray was recently asked if Christopher Steele was indirectly working for Putin, he refused to answer in the open hearing, saying that the information was classified. Which basically means yes.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018...-answer-video/

Funny how the evidence for collusion keeps leading us away from Trump and to the Democrats.

The Jerk has reminded me elsewhere that he was not supportive of Obama's efforts to affect Israeli election results.

I agree with Wray that the information requested was classified; he was working for the FBI at the time, which means that any other of his connections need to stay under wraps (that information should have too, and Steele's outing of himself got him fired).

[Zymologist]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but is there a way to actually read the Steele Dossier?

[Sparko]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but is there a way to actually read the Steele Dossier?

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...legations.html

[Mountain Man]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but is there a way to actually read the Steele Dossier?

It's a dumb question only because you'll be stupider for having read it. It reads like a tabloid newspaper article, because that's essentially what it is.

[Juvenal]

The left likes to blame "Russian hackers" and "Russian twitter bots" whenever anything doesn't go the way they like. It is their scapegoat. And it is getting old. It has become the left's "crying wolf"

I'm not following this. Is there something that has recently displeased the left that has some connection to the Times event in the o/p? I've found that right wing, well, "known propaganda websites," like to search out left wing fringe sites for outlandish nuggets, but life's too short for me to spend quality time with either of them.

[Juvenal]

These are the same liberals who had no problem whatsoever with Obama openly campaigning against Netanyahu in Israel's election. They're just crying now because they didn't get the result they wanted.

Also, when Wray was recently asked if Christopher Steele was indirectly working for Putin, he refused to answer in the open hearing, saying that the information was classified. Which basically means yes.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018...-answer-video/

Funny how the evidence for collusion keeps leading us away from Trump and to the Democrats.

Here's the exchange under discussion.

Sen. Tom Cotton: Mr. Wray are you aware of a gentleman by the name of Oleg Derispaska?

FBI Chief Christopher Wray: I’ve heard the name.

Cotton: Is it fair to call him a Putin-linked Russian oligarch.

Wray: Well I’ll leave that characterization to others and certainly not in this setting.

Cotton: Chuck Grassley the chairman of the Judiciary Committee last week sent a letter to a London based lawyer who represents Derispaska and asked if Mr Steele was employed either directly or indirectly by Oleg Derispaska at the time he was running the Steele dossier. Do you know if Christopher Steele worked for Oleg Derispaska?

Wray: That’s not something I can answer.

Cotton: Could we discuss it in a classified setting?:

Wray: There might be more we can say there.

Cotton: Thank you

I'm not seeing much to mine there.

I can't find a full transcript yet, but anyone interested should note the hearing itself is available at the committee website.

Open Hearing: Worldwide Threats Hearing