Anonymous ID: d4b96b March 9, 2023, 5 a.m. No.18473093   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3144 >>3241 >>3244 >>3501 >>3542

So I'm reading this transcript of an interview between former clown Michael Morell and Shelby Pierson.

Interview is posted on CBS, date isJanuary 22 2020

Pierson was in the notables a few days ago due to a nameredacted twitter space/thread discussing her role in the election censorship regime.

She was assigned the "Election Threat Executive" by roadblock Dan Coats

Morell is an obivious douche being former C_A director and one of the 51 treasonous cunts that lied about Hunter's laptop.

 

Look what Shelby Pierson says to Morrell, 11 months before the election.

 

On protecting 2020: "What we're trying to do now is handle this in real time. And I think that's something that I think is not only a tall task for us but one that I'd like the American public to have confidence in, that we're not trying to simply intellectually look back on what occurs in 2021 past inauguration.What we want to do is be able to affect this in real time and so that we have fair, safe elections from foreign interference."

 

>https://archive.ph/Vf29C#selection-2183.272-2183.294

 

PB below

>>18467926 Everything always comes back to Ukraine

>>18462027, >>18462034, Twat Space on Censoring Shelby Pierson of ODNI

Anonymous ID: d4b96b March 9, 2023, 5:28 a.m. No.18473144   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3173 >>3244 >>3402

>>18473093

>What we want to do is be able to affect this in real time

> former clowns Michael Morell and Shelby Pierson.

Interview includes some background info on Pierson.

-Clown

-"Walked through" the Iraq war with Morrell

-image analyst so probably in on the WMD hoax

-worked Russia desk leading up to 2016 election

-the lion's share of my intelligence career as an analyst was spent in the denial and deception community

-sounds like probably worked under Clapper at some point

 

INTELLIGENCE MATTERS - SHELBY PIERSON

HOST: MICHAEL MORELL

PRODUCER: OLIVIA GAZIS, JAMIE BENSON

MICHAEL MORELL:

Shelby, welcome to Intelligence Matters. It is great to have you on the show.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Thank you so much for having me, Mike. I'm happy to be here.

MICHAEL MORELL:

So you have an incredibly important job, which we're going to spend a lot of time talking about I hope. But maybe the place to start is to ask you if you can walk through the kind of arc of your career to the point you can talk about it, right? So how did you get from being an entry-level officer at CIA to being the IC's election threat executive today?

SHELBY PIERSON:

Great. I think as your listeners know, I have two decades of experience in the intelligence community. And I had the privilege of starting as an imagery analyst at the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, which most of your listeners would now know as the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency.

MICHAEL MORELL:

And what's an imagery analyst just so people know?

SHELBY PIERSON:

So an imagery analyst spends his or her time looking at satellite photography and primarily looking at military forces or other key national security items and writes reports for the all-source community to inform policymakers and military assessments.

MICHAEL MORELL:

Maybe the best historical example of that is the Cuban Missile Crisis.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Yes, absolutely. So I had the benefit ofstarting off as a Iraqi ground forces analyst, which I think certainly dipped me in the lessons of tradecraft, particularly as we walked through the Iraq war together. But I also was able to be a leadership analyst and worked with some of ourcolleagues, like Phil Muddand others, as to how do you utilize information and intelligence to shape policy and help inform national security trajectories for the United States.

But the lion's share of my intelligence career as an analyst was spent in the denial and deception community, which really I think is somewhat of a lost discipline in a way, in terms of understanding how countries seek to deliberately manipulate the landscape of engagement with other nations.

And so the underpinnings of counterintelligence, and cyber, national decision making, and really getting at the most exquisite state secrets I think laid a good foundation for me in terms of not onlyworking the Russia accountas the national intelligence manager for Russia coming in in 2016 but also now working election security.

 

 

3536

Jul 29, 2019 1:11:56 PM EDT

Q !!mG7VJxZNCI ID: fce708 No. 7243859

https://twitter.com/JohnBrennan/status/1155797879300210688

Thank you for confirming….

COATS BAD

Ratcliffe GOOD

Sleepers present problems re: staff fills.

More coming?

Q

Anonymous ID: d4b96b March 9, 2023, 5:39 a.m. No.18473173   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3244

>>18473144

>with some of ourcolleagues, likePhil Mudd

"collegues" with this lunatic

 

>https://twitter.com/JohnBrennan/status/1155797879300210688

 

>Thank you for confirming….

Q3536 drop was 10 days after Coats adds Pierson as the Election Threats Chief.

Pierson was definitely a 'staff fill' and possibly one of the referenced 'sleepers'

Q probably referring to Coats here but could also be Pierson.

Brennan confirms firing Coats was the correct call.

FlyCoatsFly drop 5 months earlier

 

John O. Brennan

@JohnBrennan

Dan Coats served ably & with deep integrity. Ratcliffe showed abject subservience to Trump in Mueller hearings. The women & men in the Intelligence Community deserve a leader like Coats who puts nation first; not a servile Trump loyalist like Ratcliffe.

As President Trump’s director of intelligence, Dan Coats, center, an establishment Republican, clashed with the president over Russia and other issues.

nytimes.com

Dan Coats to Step Down as Intelligence Chief; Trump Picks Loyalist for Job (Published 2019)

President Trump said Representative John Ratcliffe of Texas, a staunch defender of the president, would replace Mr. Coats, who was an important link to the Republican establishment.

7:11 AM · Jul 29, 2019

Anonymous ID: d4b96b March 9, 2023, 5:58 a.m. No.18473244   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3269

>>18473093

>to affect this in real time

>>18473144

>an entry-level officer at CIA. particularly as we walked through the Iraq war together. ourcolleagues, like Phil Mudd

>>18473173 Q3536 drop was 10 days after Coats adds Pierson as the Election Threats Chief. Coats Fired

Adding the rest of the interview:

 

MICHAEL MORELL:

When did you start in 2016?

SHELBY PIERSON:

So I think some of my colleagues would laugh at this because I think it was about two weeks into that assignment in November that President Obama asked the intelligence community to write the assessment based upon the work of CIA and FBI that people now know as the 2017 intelligence community assessment. So.

MICHAEL MORELL:

Did you have a role in that?

SHELBY PIERSON:

No. As the NIM, we're certainly there from a mission management perspective. But my colleagues from the National Intelligence Council and analytic leadership of FBI and CIA handled the lion's share of the content. But from the management side, I worked closely with the team on how we disseminate that information and how do you replicate that year after year after year to create the assessments going forward. So, again, many of the planks from earlier in my career I think culminated in the creation of the ET.

MICHAEL MORELL:

And this denial and deception thing that you talk about, which is so important, denial is actions on the part of our adversaries so that we don't know what they're doing.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Right. Concealing it..

MICHAEL MORELL:

And deception is deceiving us.

SHELBY PIERSON:

And sort of manipulating of the situation. And it really has .. and I think it's important for people to understand .. that although 2016 was a watershed moment for the intelligence community, the work in counterintelligence and information operations manipulation has gone on for many, many decades. And the intelligence community has focused on that in a variety of different mechanisms.

MICHAEL MORELL:

So, Shelby, before we get to your role today, I think it would be good for our listeners if we could review what happened both in 2016 and in 2018, essentially the story of what brought us to the creation of your current job, right? So if we start with 2016, can you review for us in a broad sense what the Russians did during the 2016 campaign and why?

SHELBY PIERSON:

Sure. And as I said, I'm pleased that there is a volume of information that has been declassified out of the intelligence community. And I would refer your listeners to the 2017 report that the intelligence community put out there because I think it does an excellent job of capturing our analytic line, so to speak, as to our findings.

But to summarize, the Russians not only sought to scan and look at our voting-related infrastructure but then also utilized social media and other influence vectors to try to sway voters towards one favored candidate and also, I think as folks know, captured information from the DNC and other venues and released that information, again, to particularly sway the voting populace towards one candidate or another.

So when we look at election security as a discipline, there are sort of three different vectors that were concerned about. One is potentially an adversary compromising the actual infrastructure by which Americans vote. And we assess that that threshold was not crossed in 2016.

Secondly, we look at adversaries pursuing information relative to voter databases or voter rolls, which either they could use that to affect election day activities, deleting certain content, or also using that information to better manipulate how they focus influence operations. And in fact, our campaigns do that today.

And then thirdly is using social media and other platforms with which to manipulate or exacerbate existing social divides in the country. And so, again, all three of those vectors were looked at from a Russian perspective. And then going into 2018, I think, again, we did not assess that there were any material compromises to the voting apparatus, but there certainly was considerable influence operation-type activity.

And, as you've seen illuminated in the press and we've discussed this in very broad circumstances, we also undertook some defensive measures, particularly on the part of U.S. Cyber Command, to stop malicious content from making its way to the U.S.

MICHAEL MORELL:

Let me just ask a couple of follow-up questions on that. I don't want to make this political at all. But in terms of hurting one candidate and helping another, it was the assessment of the intelligence community that what the Russians were doing in part was designed to hurt Secretary Clinton and help..

Anonymous ID: d4b96b March 9, 2023, 6:05 a.m. No.18473269   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3311

>>18473244

>Adding the rest of the interview:

actually it's pretty long so just one more bit since workfag approaches. quite informative though and worth a full read.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Uh-huh (AFFIRM).

MICHAEL MORELL:

..President Trump, correct? And then I also wanted to ask you: As far as you know, did any other country in 2016 interfere in our elections?

SHELBY PIERSON:

The intelligence community assessment remains the same. And as you know, Mike, countries seek to influence each other all the time. And when it becomes particularly problematic is when it's covert, when it's subversive, when it's illegal. And we do not assess that any other country influenced the United States election in 2016 on the scale of what the Russians did.

MICHAEL MORELL:

So not Ukraine? Not anybody else?

SHELBY PIERSON:

Yeah.

MICHAEL MORELL:

And then the story, right? The story that the Ukrainians might have, so it's absolutely clear to me, right, outside the intelligence community, that the Russians are propagating that story. Were the Russians the one to initiate it? Or did it start somewhere else?

SHELBY PIERSON:

I think you know we can't speak about our current classified assessment on this situation. But for us all roads lead back to Russia in this particular circumstance. And that's something that we continue to monitor at this time.

MICHAEL MORELL:

So another question about 2016 and the scanning of the election infrastructure. Do you think that they were actually trying to.. had they gotten in, do you think they would have tried to use that access to change the outcome of the election? Or do you think they were just probing for possible future attacks?

SHELBY PIERSON:

I think that remains an open question. Certainly we know that countries like Russia and even beyond just the Russians have the capability to get into those systems. And it's always a question as to whether or not they will make the decision to cross that threshold themselves to sort of proverbially stuff the ballot box.

I think that that remains an option on the table for them. But then also, I think this broader question of scanning and acquiring information for broader reconnaissance and intelligence purposes and, sort of, preparation of the battlefield is certainly within our assessment as well.

MICHAEL MORELL:

So why do you think they got caught? Particularly with the scanning of the infrastructure and the infiltration of the DNC and the Clinton campaign's emails, these are sophisticated services we're talking about here. Why do you think they were so sloppy? Were they sloppy? Why do you think they got caught?

SHELBY PIERSON:

I think there's two aspects of that. 1) I'm very proud of both the work of the Central Intelligence Agency and the FBI in terms of exhausting all of our most exquisite sources that frankly shed light on this problem, that without those sources I don't know that we would have fully put that together.

So it is really important that as much as it is an issue of getting caught, it's also I think the push of trying to gain accesses into those decision-making processes. And I think that's what ultimately shed light in 2016. And, Mike, as a fellow government person, I think we all can recognize that sometimes large bureaucracies do step on each other.

And I think that was also a part of the opportunity for us here, is that it wasn't an exquisitely orchestrated operation. And as we all recognize, you get large organizations that have their respective missions and lanes in the road. And when those cross, that creates a tumult and opportunity for us to take advantage of. So I think there were opportunities that allowed us insights that might not have been gathered otherwise.

MICHAEL MORELL:

Yeah. A little bit of my sense, for what it's worth, is that you had these various Russian services sort of all competing with each other, right, to get Putin's attention. And perhaps they were a little sloppier than they would have been otherwise.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Doesn't make for a perfectly orchestrated..

MICHAEL MORELL:

Exactly.

SHELBY PIERSON:

..landscape, does it?

MICHAEL MORELL:

Exactly.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Yes.

MICHAEL MORELL:

So let me ask a couple questions about 2018. The first is: The DNI gave you a new responsibility in 2018.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Yes.

MICHAEL MORELL:

You were still doing your other job, your day job.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Yes.

MICHAEL MORELL:

But he also made you the national intelligence crisis manager for the midterms.

SHELBY PIERSON:

Yes.

Anonymous ID: d4b96b March 9, 2023, 6:14 a.m. No.18473311   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3402

>>18473269

>actually it's pretty long so just one more bit since workfag approaches. quite informative though and worth a full read.

 

one moar note.

notice how Morrell "debooonks: Ukrainian interfence. (guessing that's crowdstrike)

 

and then Shelby cuts herself off while discussing it. She almost gave it away I think.

 

>>18473269

>..President Trump, correct? And then I also wanted to ask you: As far as you know, did any other country in 2016 interfere in our elections?

 

>SHELBY PIERSON:

 

>The intelligence community assessment remains the same. And as you know, Mike, countries seek to influence each other all the time. And when it becomes particularly problematic is when it's covert, when it's subversive, when it's illegal. And we do not assess that any other country influenced the United States election in 2016 on the scale of what the Russians did.

 

>MICHAEL MORELL:

 

>So not Ukraine? Not anybody else?

 

>SHELBY PIERSON:

 

>Yeah.

 

>MICHAEL MORELL:

 

>And then the story, right? The story that the Ukrainians might have,so it's absolutely clear to me, right, outside the intelligence community, that the Russians are propagating that story. Were the Russians the one to initiate it? Or did it start somewhere else?

 

>SHELBY PIERSON:

 

>I think you know we can't speak about our current classified assessment on this situation. But for us all roads lead back to Russia in this particular circumstance. And that's something that we continue to monitor at this time.

 

 

Ukrainians might have what, Shelby??