We need to take them all down one by one, get rid of sessions and Rothstein and send in some attack dogs
Review of the ICA review -
Page 1 boilerplate about what spies do includes howlers like this:
“When Intelligence Community analysts use words such as “we assess” or “we judge,” they are conveying an analytic assessment or judgment.”
Wow I’m glad we are paying for 17 different agencies to produce tautologies for us! Actually worse than a tautology, it is as informative as saying “when I say this, I say this”.
Page 2 - half of it is blank
Page 3 - “cool” graphics
Page 4 - intentionally left blank
Page 5 - refers to “Pro-Kremlin social media actors” - gee any Russian with a Facebook account!
Page 7 - Russia wants to undermine the “liberal democratic order”. Trust me Reagan was not their comrade, and he was not liberal and he was not a Democrat. Also mentions “paid social media users or trolls”. I think the trolls we are familiar with are from the Democratic Underground lol. Bottom half of page blank
page 8 - more “cool” graphics
page 9 - table of “contents”
page 10 - more “cool” graphics
page 11 - “Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary
Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.”
I don’t think Putin gives a rat’s ass about Hillary Clinton’s comments about him.
“Beginning in June, Putin’s public comments about the US presidential race avoided directly praising President-elect Trump”. So there is no evidence Putin wanted Trump to win - but let’s use our “assessments” and “judgments”, who need “evidence”??
page 12- “In July 2015, Russian intelligence gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC)networks and maintained that access until at least June 2016.” Then the DNC is a bunch of idiots - but I repeat myself.
“Guccifer 2.0, who claimed to be an independent Romanian hacker, made multiple contradictory statements and false claims about his likely Russian identity throughout the election. Press reporting suggests more than
one person claiming to be Guccifer 2.0 interacted with journalists.” So a mystery man or men said contradictory things about himself/themselves - according to “press reporting”! Thanks! for this we pay 17 agencies billions of dollars?? for this kind of brilliant insight? Reading the “press”? Good thing Peter Strzok (who contributed to this report) is an idiot - or Trump might be in trouble.
page 13 - “RT’s most popular video on Secretary Clinton, “How 100% of the Clintons’ ‘Charity’ Went to...Themselves,” had more than 9 million views on social media platforms.” Well thank God RT reported this because the New York Times didn’t.
page 14 -”A journalist who is a leading expert on the Internet Research Agency claimed that some social media accounts that appear to be tied to Russia’s professional trolls ..started to advocate for President-elect Trump “ - this can’t be true because there aren’t any journalists who ever supported Trump! Was that Megyn Kelley? Chris Cuomo? George Will? No they are all much too SMART to support Trump right?
page 15 - now a history lesson, thanks a 1 paragraph summary of the 30 year Cold War.
and then the Annex - screen shots from RT - who knew the Russians had television? But of course I watch Russian television, doesn’t every American voter? who needs CNN when you have Russia Today? The US has the opposite, a sick media that trashes the US 24 hours a day, e.g. CNN. Why does Russia need propaganda when they have CNN?
So to summarize OMG what a pile of ... stuff.