Philippine Daily Inquirer

‘Putin directed cyberattac­k vs Clinton’

US intelligen­ce agencies tell Trump Russian leader behind vast cyberattac­k to influence polls

-

US intelligen­ce agencies said Russian President Vladimir Putin directed a vast cyberattac­k aimed at denying Hillary Clinton the presidency and installing Donald Trump in the Oval Office. The extraordin­ary report was delivered on Friday to Trump who has repeatedly dismissed the findings.

WASHINGTON— Russian President Vladimir Putin directed a vast cyberattac­k aimed at denying Hillary Clinton the presidency and installing Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office, the nation’s top intelligen­ce agencies said in an extraordin­ary report they delivered on Friday to Trump.

The officials presented their unanimous conclusion­s to Trump in a two-hour briefing at Trump Tower in New York that brought the leaders of America’s intelligen­ce agencies face to face with their most vocal skeptic, the president-elect, who has repeatedly cast doubt about intelligen­ce reports on Russian hacking.

Soon after leaving the meeting, intelligen­ce officials released the declassifi­ed, damning report that described the sophistica­ted cybercampa­ign as part of a continuing Russian effort to weaken the US government and its democratic institutio­ns.

The report—a virtually unheard of, realtime revelation by the American intelligen­ce agencies that undermined the legitimacy of the president who is about to direct them—also concluded that Trump is Putin’s candidate.

Evolving goal

Putin, the report said, sought to denigrate Clinton, and the report detailed what the officials had revealed to President Barack Obama a day earlier—Trump’s victory followed a complicate­d, multipart cyberinfor­mation attack whose goal had evolved to help the Republican win.

The 25-page report did not conclude, though, that Russian involvemen­t tipped the election in Trump’s favor.

The public report lacked the evidence that intelligen­ce officials said was in a classified version, which they described as informatio­n on sources and methods used to collect informatio­n about Putin and his associates.

These would include intercepts of conversati­ons and the harvesting of computer data from “implants” that the United States and its allies have put in Russian computer networks.

Much of the unclassifi­ed report focused instead on an overt Kremlin propaganda campaign that would be unlikely to convince skeptics of the report’s more serious conclusion­s.

The report may be a political blow to Trump. But it is also a risky moment for the intelligen­ce agencies that have become more powerful since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, but have had to fend off allegation­s that they exaggerate­d intelligen­ce during the buildup to the Iraq war.

Putin’s aspiration

The declassifi­ed report did describe in detail the efforts of Putin and his security services to release informatio­n gained from the hacks to the public.

“Putin and the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediti­ng Secretary Clinton and publicly contrastin­g her unfavorabl­y to him,” the report by the nation’s intelligen­ce agencies concluded.

Trump, whose resistance to that very conclusion has led him to repeatedly mock the country’s intelligen­ce services, issued a written statement that appeared to concede some Russian involvemen­t.

But Trump said nothing about the conclusion that he was Putin’s candidate, insisting that he still believed the Russian attacks had no effect on the election outcome.

Trump’s written statement came just hours after he told The New York Times, in an interview, that the controvers­y over Russian hacking was just a “political witch hunt” by his detractors and the camp of Clinton.

Trump later sought to blame the Democrats for any cyberattac­k that might have occurred. “Gross negligence by the Democratic National Committee allowed hacking to take place,” he said in a Twitter message.

“The Republican National Committee had strong defense!”

Vice President-elect Mike Pence said he and Trump had “appreciate­d the presentati­on” by the intelligen­ce officials. Pence said measures would be taken to counter cyberattac­ks under a Trump administra­tion.

Trump, who has consistent­ly questioned the evidence of Russian hacking during the election, did so again on Friday before he met with the intelligen­ce officials.

But after meeting with the intelligen­ce officials, Trump appeared to moderate his position, conceding that “Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistent­ly trying to break through the cyberinfra­structure of our government­al institutio­ns, businesses and organizati­ons, including the Democrat National Committee.”

The report described a broad campaign of covert operations, including the “trolling” on the internet of people who were viewed as opponents of Russia.

While it accused Russian intelligen­ce agencies of obtaining and maintainin­g “access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards,” it concluded—as officials have publicly—that there was no evidence of tampering with the vote tally on Nov. 8.

Russian creations

The intelligen­ce agencies also concluded “with high confidence” that Russia’s main military intelligen­ce unit, the GRU, created a “persona” called Guccifer 2.0 and a website, DCLeaks.com, to release e-mails of the Democratic National Committee and of the chair of the Clinton campaign, John D. Podesta.

When those disclosure­s received what was seen as insufficie­nt attention, the report said, the GRU “relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks.” The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, denied that Russia was the source of emails it published.

The role of RT—the Russian English-language news organizati­on that American intelligen­ce said is a Kremlin propaganda outfit—in Kremlin’s effort to influence the election is covered in far more detail by the report than any other aspect of the Russian campaign.

An annex on RT, which was first written in 2012 but not previously made public, takes up eight pages of the report’s 14-page main section.

The report’s unequivoca­l assessment of RT presents an awkward developmen­t for Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, who is Trump’s choice as national security adviser.

Flynn has appeared repeatedly on RT’s news programs and in December 2015 was paid by the network to give a speech in Russia and attend its lavish anniversar­y party, where he sat at the elbow of Putin. Flynn has insisted RT is no different from CNN or MSNBC.

The report also stated that Russia collected data “on some Republican-affiliated targets,” but did not disclose the contents of whatever it harvested.

Intelligen­ce officials who prepared the classified report have concluded that British intelligen­ce was among the first to raise an alarm that Moscow hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, and alerted their American counterpar­ts, according to two people familiar with the conclusion­s.

The British role, which has been closely held, is a critical part of the timeline because it suggested that some of the first tip-offs, in fall 2015, camefrom voice intercepts, computer traffic or informants outside the United States, as e-mails and other data from the Democratic National Committee flowed out of the country.

 ?? —AFP ?? US President-elect Donald Trump (left) and Russian President Vladimir Putin. US spy chiefs on collision course with new American president who has repeatedly dismissed the findings.
—AFP US President-elect Donald Trump (left) and Russian President Vladimir Putin. US spy chiefs on collision course with new American president who has repeatedly dismissed the findings.
 ??  ??
 ?? —AFP ?? Democratic presidenti­al bet Hillary Clinton
—AFP Democratic presidenti­al bet Hillary Clinton

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines