Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Wikileaks throws a bloody great monkey wrench into the works

I'm sure by now most of my readers have heard of the latest revelations from Wikileaks concerning the CIA.  I won't bother to repeat them here.  If you missed them, see these reports:

One thing to take away from these revelations, if they're true (which has yet to be established, of course), is that the CIA may have had sufficient copies of Russian and former Soviet computer malware to disguise any of its own activities as Russian, rather than US, operations.  If that's the case, it will blow wide open allegations that Russia tried to influence the US elections last year.  How will we know whether it was, in fact, Russia . . . or an organ or operatives of the 'deep state' in the USA, pretending to be Russian?  Clearly, such suspicions may play into Russia's hands, but what if they're more than just suspicions?  What if there's at least some fact behind them?

Furthermore, this will shed new light on the leaks of important information that have plagued the Trump administration since it assumed office.  What if those leaks are deliberately coming from US intelligence organs that see the administration as a threat to their continued influence, if not their very survival in their present form?  There's more than enough information, from both mainstream and 'fringe' sources, to suggest an ongoing conflict exists between the intelligence 'establishment' and the Trump administration.  For a few (out of many possible) examples, follow these links:

It's also noteworthy that at least one former senior intelligence operative, John R. Schindler, who blogs at The 20 Committee, has come out flatly and stated that there is 'something close to all-out war between the president and the country's spies'.  He speaks of agents and agencies who are in an 'ongoing skirmish' with the White House, and claims:

Our Intelligence Community is so worried by the unprecedented problems of the Trump administration—not only do senior officials possess troubling ties to the Kremlin, there are nagging questions about basic competence regarding Team Trump—that it is beginning to withhold intelligence from a White House which our spies do not trust.

Mr. Schindler is clearly a virulent opponent of Donald Trump, as evidenced by his political commentary, most recently over the treatment of Carryn Owens by the President.  I think his comments reveal his personal opinions and political convictions very clearly, and speak for themselves.

The question now, in the light of the latest Wikileaks revelations, is whether 'our spies' are themselves worthy of trust?  To quote Alice in Wonderland, "Curiouser and curiouser . . ."



Old NFO said...

It is, curiouser and curiouser, that is... And these DO raise a lot of questions. Also Lynch's 'revision' of releasability of national level intel now comes more fully into question.

trailbee said...

Scary. Unsettling.

Anonymous said...

Oh well.

Pretty sure that the spy games side of things is too much of a mess by now to ever be untangled, no matter how many questions are asked... because you can't really trust any important answers.

And I mean, neither the American or Russian side of it even in isolation, much less the whole international hassle. (And that's not to mention all the other countries that... well.)

Of course, this is pretty much by design...

Bob M said...

More and more cracks....

When the dam finally breaks, it's gonna be epic!

And using your TV as a microphone.... That's worthy of a lynching.

Anonymous said...

Not all that long ago you could google FBI controls most white supremacist groups in this country and find 50 articles that had relevant information to that subject. Googled it this morning for a blog and found nothing. How much longer will it be before articles pertaining to CIA involvement with the drug trade disappear. The deep state is erasing anything bad that can be found against them. Look for bad things to get worse. Johnny Gee

Mad Jack said...

The reason J. Edgar Hoover kept his position for such a long time is because he knew too much. Hire an elite cadre of spies, turn them into a bureaucracy and you shouldn't wonder if they collectively gets ideas about self-preservation and expansion.

All that being the case, the United States has a government like a sieve. Leaks are common, and the best thing to do if you're the government is start by controlling which leaks get emphasized and which are deniable.

I expect that if the general public knew even half of the stunts that the various administrations have pulled in the name of - progress? politics? - whatever, Marshall Law would have to be declared in order to keep the government from being overthrown.

Borepatch said...

People have been saying for 3 years that there's at least one other leaker. Probably more.

Oh, and you'll know that Trump is serious about beating the Intel community when Gen. Clapper gets charged with perjury. That will force him out and let Trump appoint his own guy.

SiGraybeard said...

To add another little asterisk to what Borepatch said, Clapper perjured himself by lying to congress. Under oath.

So when he's not under oath, on a Sunday talk show, why should I give his word any more credibility than the cleaning lady's? It's a slam dunk that unless she's a really unusual cleaning lady, she's way more credible than Clapper.

Mark Matis said...

Well actually, SiG, surely you remember that Madeleine Albright was mistaken for a cleaning lady by Albanian diplomats:

Surely Clapper is at least as credible as she, no?

I pray to God every day to send every one of these One World Government traitors to burn in hell where they belong. REGARDLESS of which party follows their name.

DavidLang said...

computer security folks have been saying all along that the claim that the hacks must have been the russians because they used the same malware as known russian hacks is bogus.

by definition, when you use malware against someone, you are putting a copy of the malware on their computer. When the attack is detected, that malware ends up being analyzed by someone and can be used by them in the future (either because they want to false-flag something or just because it works)

the links between the russians and the attacks on the DNC are thin at best.