The White House today sought to endorse recent NBC News reports which accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of “personally” directing hacks against the US election to get Donald Trump elected, with Press Secretary Josh Earnest insisting it was “pretty obvious” that Putin had directly participated in the hacking.
President Obama, speaking to NPR, also endorsed the underlying narrative, though he said there were several possible motivations for Russia to hack the US vote and that the US intelligence community hadn’t settled on a single one yet.
Irrespective of the lack of evidence and despite nebulous motives, however, President Obama did vow that the US would carry out some form of retaliatory move against Russia, saying he would do so “at a time and place of our own choosing.”
While such threats have been common enough among administration officials throughout the scandal, Obama took the matter a step farther, saying that some of the revenge attacks may “be explicit and publicized.” He did not offer details on the form that they may take.
In the past, however, US officials have suggested they would consider a “large enough” hack to be equivalent to conventional military attack and respond militarily to it. Officials also suggested back in November that the US might knock out Russia’s entire electrical grid in revenge for the putative election hack.
So while it remains unclear exactly how far President Obama is willing to go on the basis of an allegation for which no good public evidence actually exists, the signs are that he is considering something substantial, in no small part because he is facing growing criticism from other Democrats for not “doing more” against Russia.
President Obama is delivering his final briefing on Friday afternoon at 2:15, and is expected to address the moves against Russia as a part of that. That he qualified the promise of revenge as at a “time and place of our own choosing,” suggests it probably isn’t going to be immediate.
This guy aims to leave looking like a moron, doesn’t he?
Go to Hell, Obama!
It is a shame that he cannot retain even a little bit of dignity — if he indeed ever had one.
Serving a nasty deep state does that to human beings. How much longer does he have in the office to be making such decisions? Many things do not add up any more. We have US and UK establishment using media megaphone spreading the fakest of all fake stories about Aleppo and Syria — as if the whole world does not know the truth. The only people these serial liers are trying to deceive is American public.
What they are doing is obscene — and in the light of tens of thousands of people getting free from terrorists, and telling of their horrifying experiences — the lies continue. Even though there are now THOUSANDS OF EYES ON THEIR LIES, they cannot stop lying. Each day — lies are getting bigger and more obscene. Ron Paul Institute has an excellent eye wittness story of Aleppo. Donald Trump and Syria’s Aleppo have finally brought the fake mainstream propaganda to the light of day at the close of this AD 2016. Year to remember.
Or just go already.
Obama is a loathsome creature.
knocking out Russia’s electrical grid could be worse than a nuclear attack . with the potential to kill more people . He must be crazy to suggest Obama might do that
The blood soaked mass murderer Barack Hussein Obama is probably going to make one last attempt at WWIII. I would in fact be far from astonished if he didn’t announce some kind of national emergency, annul the election, and act as a dictator. It would be the logical next step to take after the war crimes of the last twenty years.
he’s looking for a scape goat for the fact Americans just killed his legacy at the ballot box, this election was one massive rejection of Obamaism, so why not blame the Russkies ? better than having to admit you’re a colossal failure.
A couple of details you won’t get from western fake news sources.
1) Obama has ordered 4000 troops to the Russian border. The troops were already planned to go there next spring, but Obama has sped up the deployments so that all will arrive before Donald Trump is sworn into office. After all, everyone knows that the Russian border is a wonderful place to have your troops in Dec and Jan.
2) There was already a major attack to try to hack the Russian financial system and major banks. It didn’t work.
do you have a source for the 4000 troop order ?
It is pretty obvious the Democrats are ignoring the people who participated in the leak, and all intelligence sources that don’t agree with their conclusions. Their behavior is no better than what W did before the Iraq War. WMD all over again.
He may try his own election hacks against Putin in 2018.
December 15, 2016 A History Of Lies: WMD, Who Said What and When
June 12, 2003 – “Information Clearing House” – Updated December 15, 2016
Intelligence leaves no doubt that Iraq continues to possess and conceal lethal weapons
George Bush, US President 18 March, 2003
Saddam’s removal is necessary to eradicate the threat from his weapons of mass destruction
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4882.htm
NPR’s careful innuendo against Russia, “news” quotes of accusations without evidence, had the gall to contrast such coverage with discussion of actually totally fake news stories. The “real” news uses a few un-named officials making claims based on secret evidence, and ignoring the intelligence officials who say the opposite. It’s fairly elegant public relations and intimidation of reporters in the trappings of news.
From the USS Maine through the Gulf Of Tonkin via Mobile Germ Warfare labs and WMD to Russian Hacking the Empire continues on its quest for…
For what, exactly?
Such incidents are blown out of proportion, sensationalized and used to get into military conflicts that are otherwise desired by some in the US. Why? Military contracts, in other words money. Or, to dominate the world, in other words intimidate countries for favorable trade terms, such as trade pacts, structural adjustment, etc – in other words, money. Certain factions position themselves to make big bucks off killing and threatening to kill people. Death for Dollars.
“Free market” capitalism requires endless growth, which is impossible. Something has to give, and America generally expects those who give in to be foreigners.
With respect Mr. Ditz, Obama’s precise words were:
“Obama said, “I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government
tries to impact the integrity of our elections … we need to take
action. And we will — at a time and place of our own choosing. Some of
it may be explicit and publicized; some of it may not be.”” – NPR
The more correct title is “Hawks put words in hedging Obama’s mouth to punish Russia for “election hacks”. At no time did Obama ever commit to saying Russia hacked the U.S. elections, the precondition for ‘revenge’. Interviewer-Inquisitor Inskeep made an accusation Obama chose to ignore.
Obama never could stop his people from doing stupid stuff, or from forcing his hand do stupid stuff on occasion, but Obama is obviously not eager to explicitly indict Russia personally. The digression to trash Putin over Russian domestic political practices and intervention in Syria has nothing to do with the leaks called Russian hacks.
Obama’s promise for action was phrased in a very generalized context – “any country” and not an explicit commitment to strike at Russia. All action appears to have been deferred until the conclusion of the intelligence review.
This means, Obama has deferred action on the Russian hack that was really an U.S. internal leak and leaving the file for Team Trump to pick up.
It would be far more serious for the POTUS to make direct threats against Russia and the context strongly suggests Obama is not himself or as POTUS threatening revenge but words are being ascribed to him that he did not make.
you are correct, and it’s just a general statement with no specific meaning.
True, a general statement on retaliation on whoever, but this kind of talking from a leader who only a week ago ordered a full investigation, even if it’s CYA for a few more weeks (sigh of relief attending) is irresponsible and immature, as well as dangerous. People get very upset over this sort of loose talk, and that’s all it is.
Again with due respect, from Jason’s third link:
http://www.npr.org/2016/12/15/505775550/obama-on-russian-hacking-we-need-to-take-action-and-we-will
“But that does not in any way, I think, detract from the basic point that everyone during the election perceived accurately—that in fact
what the Russian hack had done was create more problems for the Clinton campaign than it had for the Trump campaign.”
True, Obama did not endorse the theory Russian hacking was done to aid Trump, saying there might be several motives, but the language in the quote makes it clear he believes the Russians had hacked the election.
Retaliation seems a politically correct thing to say at this time as he makes his way out of office and into post-presidential glory.
Except, the incident is simply called “the Russian hack”. Apart from being inflammatory towards the Russians, its just the name for an internal U.S. leak attributed as a Russian hack.
Many critical intelligence specialists and former insiders, such as Craig Murray, who claims to know the leaker personally, have confirmed this is just a leak. An insider leaking privileged information he had legit access to, is different from a hack, which is an outsider stealing privileged information without legitimate access and impossible to pull off without the NSA knowing all about it via their snoop filters riddling the internet.
The President knows all this. We’ve seen it all before, the neocon hawks contrive a false flag and try and herd Obama into hostile action.
There was no reason for the Russians to hack the election and reveal where they hacked the election. Had the Russians indeed hacked the election, they would keep the information to themselves and not demonstrate access capabilities which would then be closed off, preventing further intelligence gathering while inviting retaliation.
Russian hackers certainly would not use the information to aid Trump, because there is no guarantee that the information would indeed aid Trump. Nor would aiding Trump be worth compromising whatever access they have as Trump is a notorious loose cannon whose gratitude can hardly be counted upon.
Obama also waxed eloquent in the interview about how there is an ‘understanding’ that the various national intel agencies spy all the time on one another, gathering information without committing espionage.
Obama wouldn’t call for an intel review if the Russian hack was a slam dunk against the Russians; implementing a review would be unnecessary delay allowing the Russians to ready extra defenses, which they probably already have.
Obama likely expects rogue intel agencies will try and do whatever they want, and this is one of his last attempts to enforce the Obama “Don’t do stupid stuff” doctrine, as in, don’t compromise our feelers in the Russian apparatus with contrived revenge games.
Good comment. I think you drive right into the heart of the plausibility issue here and the obfuscation coming from the oval office.