Putin Lashes Out At Obama: "Show Some Proof Or Shut Up"

Tyler Durden's picture

Putin has had enough of the relentless barrage of US accusations that he, personally, "hacked the US presidential election."

The Russian president's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said on Friday that the US must either stop accusing Russia of meddling in its elections or prove it. Peskov said it was "indecent" of the United States to "groundlessly" accuse Russia of intervention in its elections.

“You need to either stop talking about it, or finally show some kind of proof. Otherwise it just looks very indecent”, Peskov told Reporters in Tokyo where Putin is meeting with Japan PM Abe, responding to the latest accusations that Russia was responsible for hacker attacks.

Peskov also warned that Obama's threat to "retaliate" to the alleged Russian hack is "against both American and international law", hinting at open-ended escalation should Obama take the podium today at 2:15pm to officially launch cyberwar against Russia.

Previously, on Thursday, Peskov told the AP the report was "laughable nonsense", while Russian foreign ministry spox Maria Zakharova accused "Western media" of being a "shill" and a "mouthpiece of various power groups", and added that "it's not the general public who's being manipulated," Zakharova said. "the general public nowadays can distinguish the truth. It's the mass media that is manipulating themselves."

Meanwhile, on Friday Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister told state television network, Russia 24, he was "dumbstruck" by the NBC report which alleges that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved in an election hack.

The report cited U.S. intelligence officials that now believe with a "high level of confidence" that Putin became personally involved in a secret campaign to influence the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. "I think this is just silly, and the futility of the attempt to convince somebody of this is absolutely obvious," Lavrov added, according to the news outlet.

As a reminder, last night Obama vowed retaliatory action against Russia for its meddling in the US presidential election last month.  "I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing," Obama told National Public Radio. 

US intelligence agencies in October pinned blame on Russia for election-related hacking. At the time, the White House vowed a "proportional response" to the cyberactivity, though declined to preview what that response might entail. Meanwhile, both President-elect Donald Trump, the FBI, and the ODNI have dismissed the CIA's intelligence community's assessment, for the the same reason Putin finally lashed out at Obama: there is no proof.

That, however, has never stopped the US from escalating a geopolitical conflict to the point of war, or beyond, so pay close attention to what Obama says this afternoon.

According to an NBC report, a team of analysts at Eurasia Group said in a note on Friday that they believe the outgoing administration is likely to take action which could result in a significant barrier for Trump's team once he takes office in January.

"It is unlikely that U.S. intelligence reports will change Trump's intention to initiate a rapprochement with Moscow, but the congressional response following its own investigations could obstruct the new administration's effort," Eurasia Group analysts added.

At the same time, Wikileaks offered its "validation" services, tweeting that "Obama should submit any Putin documents to WikiLeaks to be authenticated to our standards if he wants them to be seen as credible."

We doubt Obama would take the whistleblower organization on its offer, even if he did have any Putin documents to authenticate.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
JailBanksters's picture

Maybe this is practice for when he becomes a Feral Judge

You don't need to prove you didn't kill that man, your word is good enough for me, case dismissed.


Kefeer's picture

Most people have no idea what it would take to hack an election; so I presume the "hacking" refers to wikileaks.  If this is true, then they need to speak plainly.  Furthermore the "media" and "politicians" need to admit just how "in the tank & bias" they were toward Hitlery and against Trump.

If this were against Trump, then it would be a dead issue already and Trump, if he complained, would be called a "cry baby" and worse.

This video demonstrates what it would take to "hack" the actual elections.  The takeaway is there would be some trail and likely many of them.

DuneCreature's picture

Of course there's a trail. ... On the Internet everything leaves a trail.

The NSA has ever last hop, skip and jump of those trails too.

Live Hard, That's What The NSA Does, Spy On Everything And Saves It All, Die Free

~ DC v4.0

OliverAnd's picture

Who cares who hacked the emails.  The contents in the emails is what matters and the American people needed to know.  The irony here is that many times the law enforcement agencies hack into our emails and yet now it is unacceptable when people hack into the emails of polititians?  If these politicians had sensitive information in their emails then the FBI, CIA, etc. should have been competent in preventing hacks from the regular Joe down the street to foreign governments. Period.  

Kefeer's picture

Where is the law enforcement?  Where are they in regards to the threats against the electorate or is that "fake news".  Woe to those who call good "evil" and evil "good" - this says the Lord.

venturen's picture

wonder if Obama will be able to get that Addjunct professor job back...as he isn't really qualified for anything else

toocrazy2yoo's picture

He'll get that sorta stuff, but he's going to scream "RAYCISS!" when he finds that he isn't pulling Bill Clinton dough for speeches. That started with Reagan, but that was so he could buy a house after he was out, old and feeble. GHWBush didn't need the money, but after Bill Clinton's time he was showered with 150, 200,000 dollar engagements but I think only because Hillary was in the Senate, then SecState, then running for President. The Clintons were rolling in dough, but they were buying influence for their money, influence that isn't now forthcoming.Bet some of them are pissed. Wonder if any of that dough came with a money-back guarantee?


Obama, he's got nothing left to offer. HIS wife is sloth, zero ambition like most of her tribe. Obama might get ten grand at a university, but Wall Street knows he's nothing, a prop and also, a bit of a moron. He's got no juice or influence, never did. He's a cardboard cutout, life-sized. Wonder who is gonna have to pony up hundreds of thousands to hear that mimblin' bumblin' stutterin prick talk over their lunch? He's less articulate than Goodfellas Spydah that Tommy shot for bein' stupid. What the fuck was this country thinking. Well, maybe he started fewer wars than Madcap McCain would have.

blargg's picture

What Putin said: "Show some proof or shut up."

What White House hears: "Fabricate some proof or shut up."

onmail1's picture

This is how the world's most powerful man should
talk to the no. 58