HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Fairfax County General :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Pages: Previous12All
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: Slander of Mark Warner by alt-right
Posted by: Thread Killer ()
Date: February 15, 2018 02:57PM

We must stop this thread before it reaches a second page!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Slander of Mark Warner by alt-right
Posted by: GOP ()
Date: February 15, 2018 03:00PM

.
Attachments:
8ef82770162687d8c437c77c192c945f0c1edacc6efeffd548ed80c5172c0ffa.jpg
8ed850b2db754d4fe7ef8681c12e252d77fe898e69581e6d4ce683d37cadac34.jpg

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Slander of Mark Warner by alt-right
Posted by: Orange is the new DNC ()
Date: February 15, 2018 03:05PM

Time for Mark Warner to go to prison and get his punk ass raped.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Slander of Mark Warner by alt-right
Posted by: Undisputed Facts ()
Date: February 15, 2018 03:09PM

Senator Warner failed to disclose the fact to his Senate colleages for 7 months that he texted with the lobbyist of a Russian oligarch who has travel restrictions placed on him by the US government.

Senator Warner attempted to covertly communicate with the lobbyist of a Russian oligarch with very close ties to Putin.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Slander of Mark Warner by alt-right
Posted by: Same Same ()
Date: February 15, 2018 03:19PM

You Bastard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Repblicans'B'Traitors Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Love when the triggered alt-right snowflake's
> > stories fall apart so they start grasping...
> By
> > the way, it is a fact that Faux News only tells
> > the truth 17% of the time:
> > http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/
> >
> > False News comes out with Mark Warner is
> secretly
> > texting with a russian oligarch - everyone
> > watching Faux New shits themselves...
> >
> > Wait... he was texting a lobbyist who had links
> to
> > Christopher Steele. Author of the Steele
> dossier
> > that the GOP started & paid for... OK...,
> > alt-right just clutching pearls.
> >
> > Oh No's... Marco Rubio tweets that Warner's had
> no
> > impact on the russian investigation. Alt-right
> > goes with fake rage over over some perceived
> time
> > lapse.
> >
> > The final nail in your bullshit coffin. An
> aide
> > to Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), the
> committee’s
> > chairman, told Fox News that the senator knew
> > Warner was trying to reach Steele through a
> > “back channel” and was not concerned by the
> > effort. Burr in fact told reporters during an
> > **October** news conference that he and Warner
> had
> > each personally attempted to reach out to
> Steele.
> > October... Hahahahah!
> >
> > Senate Intelligence Committee Russia Probe
> Press
> > Conference
> > October 4, 2017
> >
> > SENATOR RICHARD BURR:
> >
> > Busy day around the country. Mark and I
> recognize
> > the tragedy of Nevada this week, and at this
> point
> > I'm glad to say that it doesn't seem to have a
> > terrorism nexus. That's not always the outcome,
> > but our hearts and our prayers go out to all
> the
> > individuals who were affected both directly and
> > indirectly, and I can assure you that from an
> > intelligence committee standpoint and in the
> > agencies they are providing this many assets to
> > local law enforcement and to those people that
> are
> > tasked with investigation of this unbelievable
> > act.
> >
> > So we're here to update you and the American
> > people about the investigation into Russia's
> > meddling in the 2016 election. When we started
> > this investigation on 23 January of this year,
> we
> > had a very clear focus.
> >
> > We were focused on an evaluation of the ICA,
> the
> > intelligence community assessment, of Russia's
> > involvement in our 2016 election. Additionally,
> > the investigation was to look into any
> collusion
> > by either campaign during the 2016 elections.
> The
> > third piece was an assessment of the ongoing
> > Russian active measures, including information
> and
> > influence campaigns that may still exist and
> may
> > be ongoing. The investigation started with
> those
> > three buckets of interest. Now we're over 100
> > interviews later, which translates to 250 plus
> > hours of interviews; almost 4000 pages of
> > transcripts; almost 100000 thousand pages of
> > documents reviewed by our staff and some by
> > members. It includes highly classified
> > intelligence reporting. It includes e-mails
> > campaign documents and technical cyber analysis
> > products. The committee has held 11 open
> hearings
> > this calendar year that have touched on
> Russia's
> > interference in U.S. elections. I can say that
> our
> > dedicated Russia investigative staff have
> > literally worked six to seven hours a day since
> 23
> > January to get us to the point we are today.
> >
> > SENATOR MARK WARNER:
> >
> > Six or seven days a week.
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Six or seven days a week, excuse me. So far in
> the
> > interview process we have interviewed everybody
> > who had a hand or a voice in the creation of
> the
> > intelligence community assessment. We have
> spent
> > nine times the amount of time that the
> community
> > spent putting the ICA together, reviewing the
> ICA,
> > and reviewing all the supporting documents that
> > went in it. But in addition to that the things
> > that were thrown on the cutting room floor that
> > they might not have found appropriate for the
> ICA
> > itself, but we may have found of relevance to
> our
> > investigation.
> >
> > We have interviewed every official of the Obama
> > administration to fully understand what they
> saw
> > what clarity and transparency they had and the
> > Russian involvement and more importantly what
> they
> > did or did not do and what drove those actions.
> >
> > Again I'm reminded that we will come out with a
> > finding at some point.
> >
> > And part of that hopefully will be
> recommendations
> > with the changes we need to make. So we've
> tried
> > to think thoroughly through this as we can. We
> > have interviewed, literally, individuals from
> > around the world. So for those of you that
> choose
> > to stake out when the next witnesses come in
> there
> > are some that have snuck through because you
> don't
> > know who they are. Now it's safe to say that
> the
> > inquiry has expanded slightly.
> >
> > Initial interviews and document review
> generated
> > hundreds of additional requests on our part for
> > information. It identified many leads that
> > expanded our initial inquiry the volume of work
> > done by the staff has prepared the committee.
> To
> > look at some areas of our investigation that we
> > hope will very soon reach some definite
> > conclusion. But we're not there yet. We're not
> > ready to close them. One of those areas is the
> ICA
> > itself. Given that we have interviewed
> everybody
> > who had a hand in the ICA I think there is
> general
> > consensus among members and staff that we trust
> > the conclusions of the ICA. But we don't close
> our
> > consideration of it in the unlikelihood that we
> > find additional information through the
> completion
> > of our investigation. The Obama
> administration's
> > response to Russian interference – as I said
> we
> > have interviewed every person within the
> > administration, they have volunteered and they
> > have been unbelievably cooperative to come in
> and
> > share everything they knew and in most cases
> were
> > interviewed for over two hours.
> >
> > The meeting at the Mayflower — I mean be
> > specific. These are not issues that are closed.
> We
> > have not come to any final conclusions. We have
> > interviewed seven individuals that attended the
> > Mayflower event. The testimony from all seven
> were
> > consistent with each other. But we understand
> that
> > with the current investigation open there may
> be
> > additional information we find that pulling
> that
> > thread may give us some additional insight that
> we
> > don't see today.
> >
> > Changes to the platform committee: And again
> I'm
> > addressing some things that have been written
> by
> > you in this room and they may not have been on
> our
> > chart but we felt that we had to dig deeply
> into
> > them. We have, the committee staff, has
> > interviewed every person involved in the
> drafting
> > of the campaign platform. Campaign staff was
> > attempting to implement what they believed to
> be
> > guidance to be strong, to be a strong ally in
> > Ukraine but also leave the door open for better
> > relations with Russia. I'm giving you the
> feedback
> > we got from the individuals who were in the
> room
> > making the decision. Again not closed - open
> for
> > the continuation.
> >
> > The last one I want to cover is the Comey
> memos.
> > This topic has been hotly debated and the
> > committee is satisfied that our involvement
> with
> > this issue has reached a logical end as it
> relates
> > to the Russia investigation. Now again this is
> not
> > something that we've closed but we have
> exhausted
> > every person that we can talk to get
> information
> > that's pertinent to us relative to the Russia
> > investigation. Questions that you might have
> > surrounding Comey’s firing are better
> answered
> > by the general counsel or by the Justice
> > Department, not the Select Committee of
> > Intelligence in the United States Senate.
> >
> > There are concerns that we continue to pursue:
> > collusion. The committee continues to look into
> > all evidence to see if there was any hint of
> > collusion. Now I'm not going to even discuss
> the
> > initial findings because we haven't any. We've
> got
> > a tremendous amount of documents still to go
> > through. And just to put it in perspective I
> said
> > we've done over 100 interviews over 250 hours.
> We
> > currently have booked for the balance of this
> > month 25 additional interviews that may not end
> up
> > being the total but as of today there are 25
> > individuals booked to meet with our staff
> before
> > the end of this month alone pertaining to the
> > Russian investigation. We have more work to do
> as
> > it relates to collusion, but we're developing a
> > clearer picture of what happened. What I will
> > confirm is that the Russian intelligence
> service
> > is determined, clever, and I recommend that
> every
> > campaign and every election official take this
> > very seriously as we move into this November's
> > election. And as we move into preparation for
> the
> > 2018 election I will ask Vice-Chairman to cover
> > the other areas that were in the process of
> > pursuing.
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > Thank you, Richard. And I am on a saying at the
> > outset again. I am very proud of this committee
> > and proud of the way the committee has acted.
> I'm
> > proud of our staff and the enormous amount of
> work
> > they've done. I know Chairman and I see many of
> > you daily in the hallways and know that this
> feels
> > like it's taking a long time. It is taking a
> long
> > time. But getting it right and getting all the
> > facts is what we owe the American people. And
> as
> > we’ve seen, for examples, stories that
> emerged
> > in the late summer around Mr. Trump Jr's
> meeting
> > and possibilities in the Trump Tower Moscow.
> You
> > know, Chairman, I would love to find ways to
> close
> > things down, but we also still see strains and
> > threads that we need to continue to pursue. I
> want
> > to touch on two subjects.
> >
> > The first is echoing what Richard said. The
> > Russian-acted measures efforts did not end on
> > Election Day 2016. They were not only geared at
> > the United States of America. We've seen
> Russian
> > active measures take place in France. We’ve
> seen
> > concerns raised in the Netherlands. We've seen
> > concerns raised in Germany and we need to be on
> > guard. One of the things that is particularly
> > troubling to both of us is the fact that,
> become
> > evident that 21 states electoral systems were
> not
> > all penetrated, but there was at least
> ....there
> > was at least … trying to open the door in
> these
> > 21 states. It has been very disappointing to me
> > and I believe the chairman as well, that it
> took
> > 11 months for the Department of Homeland
> Security
> > to reveal those 21 states and still don't know
> why
> > exactly last Friday was the date they chose to
> > reveal that information but I still believe
> there
> > needs to be a more aggressive whole of
> government
> > approach in terms of protecting our electoral
> > system. Remember, to make a change even in a
> > national election doesn't require penetration
> into
> > 50 states arguably in states like the
> chairman's
> > and mine that could be key you could pick two
> or
> > three states and two or three jurisdictions and
> > alter an election.
> >
> > And I believe in a state like mine, where in
> > Virginia and New Jersey in 34 days, we have
> > elections, I'm glad to see the DHS has said
> they
> > are going to up their game and particularly
> help
> > those states with elections that are happening
> > this year.
> >
> > But we need to make sure that there is an
> > organized, again, whole of government approach.
> I
> > know in Virginia, for example, even before we
> > discovered that we were one of the 21 states, I
> > think the state electoral board in an abundance
> of
> > caution decertified one set of machines that
> were
> > touch screens that didn't have kind of a paper
> > ballot or a paper trail. That's one of the
> things
> > we wanted to emphasize with this briefing that
> > this is an ongoing concern and that if states
> > don't proactively move forward very shortly
> we'll
> > be getting into primary seasons early on in
> 2018.
> > And this is a this is an ongoing challenge. And
> > again I'd point out even after last week,
> > Wisconsin, Texas, and California still have
> some
> > lack of clarity about whether the appropriate
> > individuals were notified.
> >
> > I also want to raise an issue that the chairman
> > and I have been working jointly on as well, and
> > that is the Russian’s use of social media
> > platforms - social media platforms that
> > increasingly the vast majority of us turn to
> for
> > information, for news, in a way that is very
> > different. If you look, for example, in the
> realm
> > of political advertising, we've seen an over
> 700
> > percent increase in the use of digital
> political
> > advertising between 2012 and 2016. The
> expectation
> > is that may double or triple again in terms of
> the
> > next election cycle because of the ability to
> > target voters. I was concerned at first that
> some
> > of these social media platform companies did
> not
> > take this threat seriously enough. I believe
> they
> > are recognizing that threat now. They have
> > provided us with information.
> >
> > We think it's important that the three
> companies
> > that we've invited - Google Twitter and Facebook
> -
> > will appear in a public hearing so that
> Americans
> > can again hear both about how we're going to
> > protect, I would argue, three areas. One,
> making
> > sure that if you see an ad that appears on a
> > social media site, then Americans can know
> whether
> > the source of that ad was generated by foreign
> > entities. Two, make sure that if you see a
> story
> > that is trending and becoming more popular,
> > whether that trending is because a series of
> > Americans are liking that story or liking that
> > particular page generated by real individuals
> or
> > whether that's generated by bots or in some
> cases
> > it may be falsely identified accounts. For
> > example, Facebook has indicated between 30,000
> -
> > 50000 of such accounts were taken down in
> France
> > because, due to Russian interference in France.
> > And third just the notion that—both of us
> have
> > been in politics a long time—if you have
> > somebody wanting an ad for you against you, you
> > ought to be able to be able get out and take at
> > least a look at that content the same way that
> if
> > ads are run for or against you on the radio or
> > newsprint you can at least get a look at the
> > content.
> >
> > This is an ongoing process. But we're seeing
> > increasing levels of cooperation. And with that
> > I'll turn it back over to the chairman and be
> > happy to take questions.
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Let me just say that many of you have asked us,
> > “Are we going to release the Facebook ads?”
> We
> > don't release documents provided to our
> committee,
> > period.
> >
> > I’ll say it again. The Senate Intelligence
> > Committee does not release documents provided
> by
> > witnesses, companies, or whoever, whatever the
> > classification. It's not a practice that we're
> > going to get into. Clearly if any of the social
> > media platforms would like to do that, we're
> fine
> > with them doing it because we've already got
> > scheduled an open hearing because we believe
> the
> > American people deserve to hear it firsthand.
> >
> > And just to remind people on October the 25th
> we
> > will have another open hearing, number 12, with
> > Michael Cohen. On November 1st, we have invited
> > the social media companies that Mark mentioned
> to
> > be our guest at an open hearing and we feel
> > confident that they will take us up on it.
> >
> > As it relates to the Steele dossier:
> >
> > Unfortunately the committee has hit a wall. We
> > have on several occasions made attempts to
> contact
> > Mr. Steele, to meet with Mr. Steele, to include
> > personally the vice chairman and myself as two
> > individuals making that connection. Those
> offers
> > have gone unaccepted. The committee cannot
> really
> > decide the credibility of the dossier without
> > understanding things like who paid for it. Who
> are
> > your sources and sub sources?
> >
> > We're investigating a very expansive Russian
> > network of interference in U.S. elections. And
> > though we have been incredibly enlightened at
> our
> > ability to rebuild backwards the Steele dossier
> up
> > to a certain date, getting past that point has
> > been somewhat impossible. I say this because I
> > don't think we're going to find any
> intelligence
> > products that unlocked that key to pre-June of
> > 2016. My hope is that Mr. Steele will make a
> > decision to meet with either Mark and I or the
> > committee or both so that we can hear his side
> of
> > it versus for us to depict in our findings what
> > his intent or what his actions were.
> >
> > And I say that to you but I also say it to
> Chris
> > Steele.
> >
> > Potential witnesses that we might ask to come
> in
> > in the future: I strongly suggest that you come
> in
> > and speak with us if we believe that you have
> > something valuable to bring to the committee.
> If
> > you don't voluntarily do it, I will assure you
> > today you will be compelled to do it. I can
> compel
> > you to come, I can't compel you to talk. But
> that
> > would be in a very public…done in a very
> public
> > way if in fact you turned down the private
> offer.
> >
> > The committee has proven to be balanced,
> > professional and proved that we're willing to
> > listen to everybody.
> >
> > Let me say in closing for those following our
> > investigation in the press. I want you to know
> > that you only see glimpses of the amount of
> work
> > the committee has done. We're doing much of our
> > work behind closed doors to ensure the privacy
> and
> > the protection of witnesses and sensitive
> sources
> > and methods. It's become increasingly clear
> that
> > the committee has stayed focused on building
> the
> > foundation to be able to finish our
> investigation
> > thoroughly and in an accountable way. I'm
> > confident today that when we started, we chose
> > wisely by choosing our professional staff to do
> > this investigation and not to the talking heads
> > all around the country that suggested we
> couldn't
> > do this unless we went out and hire a whole new
> > group. And I think the numbers here reflect
> that.
> >
> > Ultimately, we look forward to completing our
> work
> > and presenting our findings to the public. I
> can't
> > set a date as to when that will be. Mark can't
> set
> > a date as to when that can be. We will share
> with
> > you when we have exhausted every thread of
> > intelligence, every potential witnesses that
> can
> > contribute anything to this. I don't by any
> > stretch of the imagination tell you that there
> > have been value to everybody we've met with.
> But
> > if we hadn't met with them, then you would have
> > questions as to why we didn't. Now the truth is
> > nobody in this room, and Mark and I might be
> > included, and none of us in this room may know
> > everybody we've met with.
> >
> > We're not going to share who we interview.
> We're
> > not going to share what we asked, and we are
> > certainly not going to share what they tell us.
> > We're not going to share with you the documents
> > that we got. But when you receive 100000
> documents
> > plus a large group of that coming from the
> Trump
> > campaign alone, when you look at this country's
> > most sensitive intelligence products, let me
> > assure you if we're going to get the best view
> of
> > what happened that anybody could possibly get
> at
> > the end of this process we will be sure that we
> > present to the American people our findings as
> > best we have been able to accumulate them. So
> with
> > that I'll be happy to open up for questions.
> > Chad.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Have you seen any evidence of a nexus between
> > these Russian Facebook ads with the Trump
> campaign
> > or with any political campaign?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Chad - we haven’t even had our hearing yet,
> so
> > any of the social media platforms, I think if
> you
> > look at it from 10,000 feet, the subject matter
> of
> > the ads seems to have been to create chaos in
> > every group that they could possibly identify
> in
> > America. From a standpoint of any involvement,
> let
> > us have the opportunity to have these folks and
> > ask them the questions. In many cases they
> didn't
> > even take advantage of some of the most
> technical
> > targeting tools that exist within those social
> > media companies. So I would defer answering
> your
> > question until we've completed the
> investigation.
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > Let me just say that that I believe, and I
> think
> > you will see that there will be more forensics
> > done by these companies. Again when we just
> look
> > at scale, France versus the United States for
> > example, on one of the platforms Facebook in
> terms
> > of what happened. I think they've got some more
> > work to do, and I'm pleased to say I think they
> > are out doing that work better.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Senator Burr, the president has said repeatedly
> > that any talk of collusion is a hoax. You've
> gone
> > through all of these documents, you've
> interviewed
> > all these people. At this point, is the
> president
> > right? Is this a hoax?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > I'm going to let you guys quote the president
> and
> > ask him questions about what he says. It’s
> not
> > going to be the committee where we're going to
> > have any evidence ….
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > But do you have any evidence to suggest to rule
> > out that the president knew anything about any
> of
> > these contacts between any of his associates
> and
> > the Russians?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Let me go back and say, because I thought I was
> > pretty clear, that the issue of collusion is
> still
> > open, that we continue to investigate both
> > intelligence and witnesses, and that we're not
> in
> > a position where we will come to any type of
> > temporary finding on that until we've completed
> > the process.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > So you say that the issue of collusion is still
> > open. Are you pursuing the question of whether
> > there is a link between the ads that appeared
> on
> > the social media sites and the Trump campaign?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Well let me just say, and I’ll let Mark
> address
> > it if he’d like to, if there was any
> connection
> > that would be pertinent to our investigation of
> > Russia’s influence in the elections, we have
> had
> > incredible access and cooperation by those
> social
> > media companies. Some of them have been
> > interviewed twice. At the end of the day, we
> will
> > be prepared to ask the right questions that
> will
> > answer some of your questions at the open
> hearing.
> >
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > So we also have to get we have to get to the
> > universe first. I was concerned on the frontend
> of
> > the first pass was not a thorough enough pass.
> For
> > example, I cited the fact that one entity, the
> > only ads that were produced were paid for in
> > rubles. There are various forms of payment. So
> I
> > think I think the companies are increasingly
> > understanding that their actions need to match
> > their public statements. That they realize how
> > important it is to maintain the integrity of
> our
> > democratic process.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Would you call on Facebook to release those
> ads?
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > I think at the end of the day it's important
> that
> > the public sees these ads.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Senator - two questions. You talked about that
> > level of cooperation that you've gotten from
> Obama
> > administration officials. Can you characterize
> the
> > level of cooperation and candor you’ve seen
> from
> > Trump campaign officials and those in the Trump
> > orbit?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > I can't think of a Trump campaign official that
> we
> > have asked to come in that has not come in.
> There
> > are some individuals that may have been
> involved
> > in the Trump campaign that up to this point we
> > might have limited the scope of our questions,
> but
> > with the full intent of them coming back when
> we
> > knew a little bit more and had pulled a few
> more
> > intelligence threads.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > When you compare what they’ve said to you to
> the
> > documents that you’ve reviewed, do you find
> that
> > they’ve been truthful?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > I don't think that … I think our interviews
> to
> > this point, outside of the five specific areas
> of
> > buckets that that we knew exactly what the
> > universe people we want to talk to we knew what
> we
> > were trying to find out, that were very much in
> an
> > exploratory mode trying to piece together what
> > people did, where they were, who they talked
> to.
> > In most cases we have access to email records
> text
> > messages phone records voluntarily. Usually
> when
> > you get something like that voluntarily
> somebody
> > is probably going to tell you the truth when
> they
> > answer the questions. But the reason that we
> can't
> > definitively answer some of your questions
> today
> > is we will take everything that our staff has
> put
> > in the transcripts and we will test that
> against
> > every piece of intelligence and other
> interviews
> > that we've done. To suggest that we've done
> that
> > to everybody thoroughly would be misleading. So
> > let us go through that process. But I will
> assure
> > you that if somebody has come in and not been
> > truthful with us, we will catch them on that
> and
> > they will come back and that will be the
> subject
> > of great intensity.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Based on the work done so far, what's your
> > assessment of what the Russians did do in 2016,
> > what they're doing now, and what you portend
> they
> > will do in the future?
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > Well I would just say, I think there is large
> > consensus that they hacked into political
> files,
> > released those files, in an effort to influence
> > the election. We think they actively tried to
> at
> > least test the vulnerabilities of 21 states
> > electoral systems. And we feel that they used
> the
> > social media firms, both in terms of paid
> > advertising and what I believe is more
> > problematic, in creating false accounts and
> others
> > that would drive interest toward stories or
> > groups. And generally those stories or groups
> were
> > to sow chaos and drive division in our country.
> > And I think that the pattern that they used in
> > America, they have used in other nations around
> > the world. And I fear sometimes if you add up
> all
> > they've spent, that was a decent rate of return
> > for them on their own.
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Look let me add to that if I can. We can
> > certifiably say that no vote totals were
> affected,
> > that the tallies are accurate. The outcome of
> the
> > election, based upon the counting votes. They
> did
> > not in any way shape or form that we've been
> able
> > to find alter that. I want to reiterate
> something
> > that Mark said. You can't walk away from this
> and
> > believe that Russia is not currently active in
> > trying to create chaos in our election process.
> >
> > I assume that the same tactics that we saw in
> > Montenegro and in France, in Belgium and in the
> > United States will continue to be tested within
> > our structure of the election process here.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Thank you, Senator. Pivoting off that point,
> you
> > just noted that Facebook - they say 10 million
> > people saw their ads, there was an information
> > campaign waged against one candidate by the
> > Russians, and of course they probed 21 states,
> > perhaps more that we didn’t catch. So can you
> > definitely look at the American public, Senator
> > Burr, and say that the election was not
> influenced
> > in any way by this massive Russian operation?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Well, let me take issue with your premise of
> your
> > question. Neither Mark nor I said that there was
> a
> > campaign targeted against one. We're looking at
> > both campaigns.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Well that is what the ICA has said.
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > The ICA did not look at collusion of the
> > campaigns. The ICA looked at Russian - let me
> > finish -Russian involvement in the election
> > process. We're in agreement with that. We have
> no
> > come to any determination on collusion or
> Russia's
> > preferences. If we used solely the social media
> > advertising that we seen, there's no way that
> you
> > can look at that and say that that was to help
> the
> > right side of the ideological charge and not
> the
> > left or vice versa. They were indiscriminate.
> >
> > One of the things that's most challenging to
> this
> > investigation is, with the exception of certain
> > pieces that have already been discussed, it
> seems
> > that the overall theme of the Russian
> involvement
> > in the U.S. elections was to create chaos at
> every
> > level. And I would tell you the fact that we're
> > sitting here nine months later investigating it
> > … They have been pretty darn successful.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Chairman Burr, how would you rate the
> > administration and the country's response to
> this
> > in terms of preventing something like this from
> > happening in the future? And how ready are we
> for
> > Virginia's election and 2018? What more needs
> to
> > be done?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > I’ll let Mark address Virginia. But let me
> just
> > say this. Our role is not to necessarily
> suggest
> > here the things we need to do. Our
> investigation
> > should create a roadmap for communities of the
> > proper jurisdiction to follow for states to
> > follow. Mark and I made a decision to take the
> > initiative in our authorization bill. That we
> > require in our authorization bill that there be
> a
> > designated person in every state who has a
> > security clearance to be briefed on election
> > issues. We couldn't say Secretary of State
> because
> > that's not the case in every state but we felt
> > compelled with what we had learned to make sure
> > that just the fact that somebody wasn't clear
> to
> > the high level would put a state out there not
> > being notified. So we've made some steps in the
> > right direction as we see those things that we
> > think it's appropriate for do we will do if we
> say
> > it's not appropriate for us to do. We will
> > hopefully convey that in a way that presents a
> > roadmap for somebody else.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Are you satisfied that the administration is
> > paying close enough level of attention to this?
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > And I appreciate what Richard just said. I
> think
> > you're putting this impetus in our intel bill.
> I
> > mean it was it seemed very strange to me that
> > somehow there was an excuse being even we can't
> > tell top election official because he or she
> may
> > not have high enough clearance. I'm glad to
> see,
> > as of last Friday, DHS has changed that
> position.
> >
> > But I do believe we need more, and this is you
> > know I would say that, this administration or
> any
> > administration, a whole of government approach
> > about protecting our electoral system, but we
> need
> > a whole of government approach for that matter
> and
> > the society approach in terms of our cyber
> > vulnerabilities across the board.
> >
> > I came from a hearing this morning where there
> was
> > pretty uniform consensus that the Equifax
> breach
> > where most of our private personal, financial
> > information may be in the hands now of rogue
> > elements, and that there wasn’t an
> appropriate
> > cyber protection there. So this is why we
> > characterize some of these … wild wild west
> this
> > whole realm in cyber. We all need to step up
> our
> > game center as the Russian lawyer who never had
> a
> > problem like you or do you think this is.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Do you think that this report needs to be done,
> > that your conclusion has happened before the
> 2018
> > election in order to warn people about what can
> > happen next and where do you think the most
> work
> > needs to be done?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > I’m not going to set an artificial deadline
> but
> > I think Mark and I would agree we we've got to
> > make our facts as it relates to Russia's
> > involvement in our election available to the
> > public prior to the primaries getting started
> in
> > 2018 which means sometime in the next year but
> > it's still my aspirational goal to finish the
> > entire investigation this calendar year,
> don’t
> > think I’ve changed. But, when we started nine
> > months ago. I saw three buckets, and today I
> > talked about five or six. So I didn't dream
> then
> > what would what would have been to an end and
> > predict what witnesses are going to share with
> us
> > that might lead us in a different direction.
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > And one of the things and again I think that
> the
> > committee's been very good at it, is that. you
> > know we're going to follow the facts. And we
> want
> > to do it as quickly as possible. We want to do
> it
> > right and follow the facts
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Is the Russian attorney going to come through
> –
> > the Russian attorney that met with Donald Trump
> > Jr, she’s offered to come through and offer
> > testimony in open committee. Have you reach out
> to
> > her or is she on the 25 on your list?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > How do you know we haven’t already
> interviewed
> > her?
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > I didn’t say I did. I’m asking.
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > [Laughter]
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > This is a question for both of you. Is there
> any
> > progress on creating legislation that would
> create
> > new laws regulating how political advertising
> > works on these platforms that Republicans have
> > discussed with Democrats. I know that you're
> are
> > working with Senator Klobuchar are working on
> > something ….
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > Yeah, Senator Klobuchar and I are working on
> > something that would, I believe be the lightest
> > touch possible. And that light touch would
> focus
> > on making sure that foreign, paid-for
> advertising
> > doesn't penetrate our political system. And if
> > there was an ability to at least look at the
> > content that appears in political campaigns the
> > same way that similar rules of the rest of the
> > media already have. Some of the companies, I've
> > heard at least comments that they are they are
> > open to this type of disclosure.
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Well let me just state the fact that it is
> illegal
> > today for foreign money to find its way into
> U.S.
> > elections. So it's not like we've got to
> rewrite
> > some laws. I just want to get clarification.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > I just wanted to get a clarification on this.
> So
> > far you have not been able to verify the
> > intelligence community assessment .. that
> Russia
> > was weighing in on the side of Donald Trump?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > We feel very confident that the ICA's accuracy
> is
> > going to be supported by our committee. We're
> not
> > willing to close the issue given the nature of
> the
> > rest of the investigation that we might get a
> > threat of intelligence that suggests possibly
> an
> > area of the ICA that we pursue… that our
> > interpretation is different. So we're leaving
> it
> > open. It's not closed. And I think any smart
> > investigation would stay open until we
> completely
> > …
> >
> > SENATOR WARNER:
> >
> > And that’s one of the reasons that we are
> trying
> > to be very careful here, as Richard mentioned,
> > some of these meetings where we’ve talked to
> > most folks. We also know we will have to, this
> has
> > to be talked through with all the balance the
> > committee members and that we’re being extra
> > cautious here saying, “We're not reaching
> final
> > conclusions until we've had those conversations
> > with all of you.”
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Could there ever be a point where the meddling
> > from Russia was so overwhelming that it could
> > indeed lead to the negating of the results of
> the
> > election?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Maybe, maybe that's a theory people are working
> > under. All I can tell you is that the votes
> were
> > counted; one person won, and that's how going
> to
> > stay.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Prior to the release of your committee’s
> report
> > will there be any coordination on what the
> Senate
> > Judiciary Committee has found in its own
> > investigation?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Well listen we're focused on our investigation.
> > Everybody has their jurisdictional lanes. My
> hope
> > is that they stay within those lanes. We talk.
> I
> > won't say regularly, but we need to with the
> > special counsel - the special counsel is
> focused
> > on criminal acts. We're not focused on criminal
> > acts. If we find one then they're the first
> phone
> > call we make.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Senator Burr, as you know the president is the
> > commander-in-chief and he’s charged with
> > protecting the country, but he hasn’t really
> > spoken out on this issue, other than to call it
> a
> > hoax. Do you want to see him lead some kind of
> > effort – speak out, do something tangible to
> > protect the country from what you consider the
> > ongoing acts from Russia?
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > Listen I think the vice chairman alluded to the
> > fact that although it was slow getting DHS to
> > recognize this. It didn't take as long as it
> did
> > for the last administration to run the clock on
> > it. So we're not trying to look back and can
> point
> > to things that were done wrong.
> >
> > Everybody's done things wrong.
> >
> > REPORTER:
> >
> > Should the president now take what you’re
> saying
> > today and speak out against and lead some kind
> of
> > formal effort to protect the country from
> > Russian…
> >
> > SENATOR BURR:
> >
> > I’m not asking the president to a press
> briefing
> > that we give about progress and assume that
> that
> > in any way shape or form fully encapsulates
> what
> > our final report will say. What I will say is
> what
> > the vice chairman pointed out - that the
> > Department of Homeland Security has taken a
> > different posture. It's his administration. I'm
> > sure they had his direction or his leadership's
> > direction. We're pleased with the progress that
> > they're making but some of the things that
> > hopefully we will be able to point out will be
> > important steps to be incorporated in their
> > thought process moving forward.
> >
> > Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank. You.
>
> Give me a fucking break, some stupid anonymous
> blog poster knows the inner working of a Senate
> intelligence panel.

Yep!

Options: ReplyQuote
Pages: Previous12All
Current Page: 2 of 2


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **    **  **    **  ********   **    **  **      ** 
  **  **   **   **   **     **  ***   **  **  **  ** 
   ****    **  **    **     **  ****  **  **  **  ** 
    **     *****     ********   ** ** **  **  **  ** 
    **     **  **    **         **  ****  **  **  ** 
    **     **   **   **         **   ***  **  **  ** 
    **     **    **  **         **    **   ***  ***  
This forum powered by Phorum.