Slashdot Mirror
'DNC Hacker' Unmasked: He Really Works for Russia, Researchers Say (thedailybeast.com)
The hacker who claimed to compromise the DNC swore he was Romanian, but new investigation shows he worked directly for Russia President Vladimir Putin's government in Moscow. The Daily Beast reports: The hacker who claims to have stolen emails from the Democratic National Committee and provided them to WikiLeaks is actually an agent of the Russian government and part of an orchestrated attempt to influence U.S. media coverage surrounding the presidential election, a security research group concluded on Tuesday. The researchers, at Arlington, Va.-based ThreatConnect, traced the self-described Romanian hacker Guccifer 2.0 back to an Internet server in Russia and to a digital address that has been linked in the past to Russian online scams. Far from being a single, sophisticated hacker, Guccifer 2.0 is more likely a collection of people from the propaganda arm of the Russian government meant to deflect attention away from Moscow as the force behind the DNC hacks and leaks of emails, the researchers found. ThreatConnect is the first known group of experts to link the self-proclaimed hacker to a Russian operation, amidst an ongoing FBI investigation and a presidential campaign rocked by the release of DNC emails that have embarrassed senior party leaders and inflamed intraparty tensions turning the Democratic National Convention. The emails revealed that party insiders plotted ways to undermine Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential bid. The researchers at the aforementioned security firm are basing their conclusion on three signals: the hacker used Russian computers to edit PDF files, he also used Russian VPN -- and other internet infrastructure from the country, and that he was unable to speak Romanian.
lets blame russia
Nothing to see here. These crimes were exposed by someone we don't like so much. That makes it OK.
I was a Sanders supporter. Now I'll vote for Jill Stein.
I'll *****NEVER***** vote for Hillary Clinton..... EVER.
I'm not sure the press is smart enough to understand that use of a Russian VPN means they're working for the Russian government...but I'd expect /. editors to understand at least the basics of, you know, connectivity.
As if Hillary vs. Trump was not popcorny enough, we get a hacker from Russia trying to influence elections? Not even sure if this entire theory is believable but just sit back and watch!
That's CLEARLY the domain of American political parties!
From the same people who said...
"No classified email on my server"
"No material on my email that was classified at the time"
"No material marked classified on my server"
"I handed over all work related emails"
"The DNC did not collude to keep Sanders from winning"
"The DNC doesn't work with news media to plant stories against Sanders"
If they ever got caught telling the truth once, this might be believable. Who hacked the DNC server doesn't matter, what matters is how corrupt the DNC is from the content of the emails. They did their best to disenfranchise their base. Your vote doesn't mean anything to them, only their power and they are willing to lie, cheat and steal to keep that power and extend it over you.
What a joke the DNC is. How long till Debbie Waserman Schultz gets another high paid job thanks to Clinton? Oops, already happened, so corrupt she had to be fired from the DNC but is still truthful enough to work for Clinton.
Is this some pathetic attempt at political spin or misdirection?
1. "At this point, what difference does it make" who he was working for? Are the emails themselves not blatant enough for anyone?
2. What kind of half-assed chicken-shit "Security researchers" draw a connection between Putin's government and a Russian based malware serving IP address? I won't for a second deny that Russia and Putin's goverenment work extensively in hacking the wold. But, there are literally thousands of malware servers in Russia that Putin's government knows nothing about.
What matters is if what was spilled is the truth.
Bernstein/Woodward may have been peadoes, murderers, or worse, NRA members, but that had no bearing on Nixon's dismemberment.
The real issue is the fact that DNC tried to stop Bernie with a few underhanded tactics.
The DNC is now trying to redirect the focus everyone to say the Russians did this rather than asking why Bernie didn't get a fair shot or why Hilary was basically given a free pass. I am more worried about why these emails were written in the first place and why the people at the DNC were stupid enough to think their email server couldn't be hacked.
This Slashvertisement was sponsored by the "DNC" and "Debby doesn't do Philadelphia"...
If he's in cahoots with Putin and the like, why are the GOP still so in love with him? Most of us remember a time when we were constantly being told to fear the Russians. The GOP still likes to rattle their sabres at them from time to time, yet for some reason now they're buddy-buddy.
It would be interesting to see what Drumpf even knows about Putin. Does he know Putin's actual net worth (even the CIA doesn't know that)? Does he know where Putin's family name comes from (wikipedia can't resolve that)? Does he even know that the Russian constitution was rewritten to allow Putin to have his current position of power?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Doesn't matter why he did it
Doesn't matter who he did it for
What matters is what DNC did, they played a game, they lost, and now they say Russia is winning so vote for us because Russia is bad, but infact Russia is irrelevant, it's just a tactic to make Republicans look bad now, even though Republicans did nothing wrong (in this context).
It's payback time for Crooked Liar Hillary! leading this:
Election-meddling fiasco hits US-Russia relations
Revelations about email transactions between the US State Department and the Russian election watchdog Golos prior to Russia's parliamentary elections threaten to bring the reset to a grinding halt.
Golos, an independent watchdog that has been monitoring elections in Russia for 10 years, was fined 30,000 rubles ($1,000) last week by a Moscow court for publishing “election-related opinion polls and research” after a deadline for publishing such material had passed (it is illegal in Russia to publish such information five days or less before an election).
Duma officials who petitioned to start a probe with the prosecutor’s office argued that the NGO was funded by “foreign organizations” hoping to influence the results of the elections.
...
"We favor foreign observers monitoring our political electoral processes. We favor this, we are not against this," he said. "Howeverwhen financing comes to some domestic organizations which are supposedly national, but which in fact work on foreign money and perform to the music of a foreign state during electoral processes, we need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs and defend our sovereignty.”
Well not really, but would it surprise anyone at this point?
Granted the mainstream media won't cover it of course...so it'll go largely unnoticed. Just like the title 'worked directly for russian president' ... 's government. Well all that says is he isn't an independent contractor...BFD. Tons of people (hackers included) work for the various first world governments.
You could also say that the soldiers who "worked directly for Obama" ... 's government. Yawn.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
directly for Russia President Vladimir Putin's government in Moscow.
That's a convoluted way of saying "for Russia."
Unless... plot twist! It was in Moscow, Iowa!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
....attack the messenger.
Isn't that pretty much Lawyer Response 101?
Dovetails nicely with the purported "vast Right Wing conspiracy", doesn't it?
If a hacker reveals illegal conduct, is it "less illegal" if the hacker is Russian?
I haven't noticed anyone asserting the emails are not genuine.
-Styopa
They're so desperate to wag the dog at the moment the left would claim he came from the moon if he could. (my apologies to any moon dwellers for being associated with liberals and democrats)
After all, who wins if US and Russia fight? China has more hackers than anybody. With 1.2 billion people, I'd take 100 million and simulate the politics and economies of US, Russia, other competitors and figure out how to hack and undermine them.
g=
And if the server resided in Antarktida, would that make the president of Pinguin Republic guilty by association as well? Or if it resided in Papua-New Guinea, would that make the most powerful local cannibal chief guilty by association as well?
Certainly couldn't be a diversion from a DNC "leadership" to which rules mean nothing.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Never heard of them. How do I know they aren't just an arm of the same dirty DNC. Why would this Guccifer person speak to anyone? Does the dude want to do 30 years to life? Unlikely he spoke to anyone.
First of all, whoever proved the head of the DNC was corrupt did the world a favor.
Second, I also have a VPN service that has a Russian server that I use to browse the internet with anonymity. I figure if Snowden survives there then I should be fine to browse the web with some degree of NSA protection.
This correlation is nonsense, more propaganda from the DNC to try to control the masses via emotion and without logic.
One party nominated a racist. The other party nominated a serial liar. And still, I bet the Libertarian and Green parties won't get 5% of the vote. I suspect that Hillary and Trump could beat American children in public while shouting "America sucks" and we still wouldn't get a third-party into office.
My favorite is the guy attending the RNC, wearing the "STOP TRUMP" t-shirt, who said he would vote for Trump. **NUCLEAR FACEPALM**
So, no ethnic Romanians work for Putin?
In the US I know many people who claim to be ethnic XYZ and cannot speak a word of ethnic XYZ language. Some of these people work for the Feds.
So, what is the point of the claim?
Putin has a mancrush on Trump.
isn't that illegal in Russia?
and Trump and Putin conspired together to make it happen!
and Kim Jong Un also!
and they have guns!
18 USC 599
Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 721; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, 330016(1)(H), (L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
that has sworn to be impartial between democratic candidates. All those people who donated money to DNC were fraudelently mislead. Who is going to jail for this? It is more than just not following their own rules when thousands of people donated money based on claims by the DNC they were impartial.
Another example of common sense and rules that apply to everyone else don't apply here & any violation is swept under the rug with some low lever person resigning and being handed another coveted spot.
Putin's spy buddies are having a great laugh about this.
Who would have thought it would be so easy to help the USA defeat itself.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
It's what's IN THEM that is the story behind the curtain nobody wants you to see
To my knowledge, ThreatConnect was paid by the DNC to do this investigation, and the company that owns the news source used as a reference here (The Daily Beast is owned by IAC) has Chelsea Clinton on their board of directors.
I would not draw any conclusions until this is independently confirmed.
Whine, complain, deny, everyone else did it, attack the people who are exposing information to distract from the real story.
It always the "OTHER" party that would do what was revealed.
People, the only way to trust politicians and their support organization is too figuratively make them sweat blood as to being elected or re-elected. If you vote party lines automatically, you are part of the problem.
This one is blaming Ivan. Russia.
STOP FUCKING LYING CIA.
Maybe I'm just not understanding how these investigations happen or what constitutes valid evidence, but how can we ever really know who did a hack like this?
With VPNs, botnets, address spoofing, couldn't the actual hacker make it look like pretty much anyone else did it? A good hacker wouldn't be found at all, and a really good hacker would cover their own tracks and leave a trail that makes it look like it came from Russian intelligence.
Do they blame all of their cyber-problems on " Those American Hackers " ?
Or is it just this country where we blame whatever the problem of the week is on whatever country has a higher "Evil Quotient" at the time ?
( Usually Russia, China or Iran if you've noticed the trend )
And I also said that they shouldn't be claiming their emails are hacked by Russians, after all we've been hearing about hacked emails for the past year. They may be telling the truth, but making the argument at all is bad optics.
But then I hear this from Trump yesterday, clarifying his previous statements on NATO, which makes the Russian involvement seem more suspicious:
NATO. They ask me about NATO. Right? You saw that the other day, Meet the Press.
"Well, I hear you want to give up NATO..." I don't want to give up NATO. I like... NATO's fine. But they gotta pay. They gotta pay.
So we have all of these countries, and they're not paying. They're not paying. And we're protecting them.
And the question is: "If such-and-such a country were attacked, are you willing to start World War 3?" Because that's essentially what's happening. They don't pay.
They say, "Well, we have a treaty!" So they have these articles: "Donald Trump wants to give up NATO." No no no. I don't want to give up anything. I want them to pay.
We're a country. It's not 40 years ago, 50 years ago. And now, most people in this audience don't even know, that we're protecting Japan, China, we're protecting Germany! Nothing but money.
We're protecting Saudi Arabia. If we weren't around, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia wouldn't be around for two weeks. We protect Saudi Arabia. They don't pay us what that should be paying. We're losing everything. Folks, we lose on everything.
We protect South Korea. We have 28,000 soldiers on the line, against the maniac on the right. We have 28,000 soldiers against North Korea, separated. Pretty dangerous stuff, considering he's got a million-person army. Pretty dangerous stuff.
So we're doing all this, and yet they're paying us a fraction of what it is.
I saw it with Japan. And by the way, I think it's fine- but they've got to pay us. We don't have the money. They gotta pay us. And they will pay us if the right person asks. If the right person asks. They will. They will.
Do you have any idea the difference that makes for our country if we get countries to take care of us the way they should.
We had a general recently, because we've been doing this, and he said, "Mr. Trump doesn't understand that Japan is paying almost 50 percent of the cost of what we do for them." And I said, why not 100 percent? Why? Tell me why. Tell me why.
Folks, we're run by incompetent people and it's going to end. And it's going to end soon. Because people aren't taking it anymore.
Now, when I talk about we're going to protect Japan, which is great, now, you always have to be prepared to walk. And I said, in one of the articles, they said, "Now what would happen if they didn't pay." I said, âoeWe have to walk."
Hillary Clinton said, "He wants to walk from Japan!" Now, see, what she did, she makes it impossible to negotiate. She's not a negotiator. She's a fool. She's a fool. No, she's a fool.
Because when you tell Japan- very smart people, great people, I have many friends there- but when you say you're not prepared to walk, you'll never walk? So she said, "How dare he say that! We will never walk!"
Then they're never going to pay us. We may have to walk! Folks, we may have to walk.
But- the same thing with Germany. We're spending a fortune in Germany. Same thing with Saudi Arabia. Let me tell you. Saudi Arabia? So we'll say this: "Folks, you gotta pay us. You gotta pay us. Sorry."
They're gonna say no. Bye-bye! Within two days, they're calling back, "Get back over here, we'll pay you whatever the hell you want."
OK? One hundred percent.
But whe
Report is obviously planted by Obama and the DNC to spread FUD.
Ha
I don't remember this much controversy when the Russians were giving millions to the Clinton Foundation to award them with a giant uranium deal. Don't shoot the messenger on this one. She is what she is.
It's so hard to tell sometimes.
E.g. Treveonta, Adrianandious, Tyriekus ...
PARIS, TX - Paris Police have made two more arrests in the case of a man shot and killed just yards from his home last week.
Authorities say 17-year old Treveonta Clark and a 16-year old boy were arrested Tuesday afternoon and charged with capital murder, in the death of 28-year old Roland Williams.
21-year old Adrianandious Blackeyes and 18-year old Tyriekus Edwards were arrested Saturday and have also been charged with capital murder.
http://www.kxii.com/home/headl...
So there's a problem here - a deep ethical query in fact. Let's say that Russia did provide the intel - did they lie? Evidence source aside, the evidence still must be examined - and in the end, we must decide.
Herein lies an ethical debate - Trump may be a moppet-faced gibbon, but he didn't go colluding with the RNC to support him - he's in because it was inevitable. What Hilary did with the DNC on the other hand, was cheating. The margin between her and Bernie was close - but she stacked the deck in the DNC, and they were against Bernie (and the rest) from the start. The top of our party is supposed to follow the people's choices - and not make their choice and jam it down our throats, as they are doing.
Isn't there a law against ursurping the democratic process in this country? In any case, anyone with a brain will see this, and not vote - those without brains will vote Trump. Ugh. End of days.
Notice how "conspiracies" are only real when they don't imply the culpability of the western establishment
Then reflect on how utterly insane popular opinion is in general
The Democratic party has a huge problem. It's also a pretty simple problem: If the US equivalent of the Australian Electoral commission got caught picking a favourite between one of the two major parties there would be a royal commission and a complete overhaul of our political system. The Democratic Party in America should be showing the same level of impartiality between candidates as the Electoral Commission does. It hasn't, and now people are rightly pissed off. This issue isn't going to go away. They have a serious problem on their hands and I don't think that merely putting Sanders on the ballot to run against Hillary for the nomination is enough to fix it.
Conspiring to violate 18 USC/599 is a federal crime.
Assuming that the e-mail is authentic. It might well be, but there should be some serious scrutiny of any evidence that has been 'dug up' by Russian intelligence running false flag ops to influence US elections. They might just be up to something....
Trump and Putin, what a pair they would make...I bet they would get on like Hitler and Mussolini...
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
"back to an Internet server in Russia and to a digital address that has been linked in the past to Russian online scams"
Or maybe, he hacked the Russians to make it look like they did it.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Wait, in 2012, the Democrats said Russia wasn't a threat. Now they're claiming Russian has the power to influence our elections?
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
...Must be around here somewhere. You can never find it when you need it.
Nice try to sway the idiots. It doesnt matter where it came from or why, in the end some nasty stuff was being pulled by an organization that was supposed to be neutral.
In Soviet Russia, everyone works for the State!
Amazing how quickly they could pinpoint it on the Russians, but it tooks years for Hillary's email scandal to break
It is not important who leaked the emails. If it was Putin himself using his Yotaphone, then thank him for exposing the crimes and corruption of the DNC.
Now, go and investigate, and punish whoever needs to be punished.
For at least one link that isn't Vice, TechCrunch, ArsTechnica or anyone else in the tiny gamut of sites (8...9,,?) Slashdot posts from. Ten bookmarks, and there's no point even coming here any more.
This actually underscores again that "hacker" is now mainstreamese for "bogeyman of teh intarwebz". So this one bogeyman got "unmasked" and turned out to seem to be from that old bogeyman pinko commieland^W^WRussia. Because IP address is guarantee of identity, right? That's too good to fact check, so it gets lots of airtime. In fact, I bet PR companies are involved, to mold those pesky little facts into some more convenient form. For whoever is paying those firms, of course.
Given how often the current new new /. editor crop likes to post crap articles, crap headlines, and generally likes to bandy "hacker" around, no, I no longer expect /. editors to know shit other than what the mainstream and the shouty chorus of s'kiddies and their PR releasing "computer security" companies choose to declare fact. This hasn't meant anything useful for years, in fact. Go on, look back. Do a little comparing.
Can we get some coverage of the actual leaks, pretty please? Corruption at the DNC? Clinton's underhanded tactics? I mean, salient stuff like that. I don't care if it's Putin himself who got those emails.
I only partly agree with this. If a foreign country is trying to affect our elections, that's something worth considering. Especially because if they'll do something minor like this they may do something major and less-easily-traced later.
So people within our borders actively manipulating the elections is fine, but someone outside of our elections proving the fraud most of us suspected is bad. Got it.
This is very true. The DNC was unhappy with Sanders, but never thought he had a chance of winning and didn't do much against him. Some talk, but no action.
That is a Red Herring. Sanders was the only candidate allowed to compete and Hillary is so bad she would have lost if not for the cheating in the party.
I really don't know how primaries should work.
How about parties work as we tell people they work. The people get a group of candidates from which to choose from, and the party follows the people's voice. Does that not match the exact definition of "Democratic" that the party is named after?
That's a red herring. The DNC candidate has been under near-constant "investigations"
The Mark Twain quote about the 3 kinds of lies comes to mind reading this one. Hillary has a very long history of being viewed negatively. Her being under "investigations" does not sweep things under the rug, but is surely not the only issue with the negativity facing the person's statement. At least as important, these people (Hillary et. al) have all been found to be GUILTY of the charges people are investigating.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
One of the most successful time periods for Athens was when people were ruled by those who lost the lottery and had to hold public office.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
First off, by referring to the question I asked as a 'conspiracy theory', you are suggesting that asking questions about the chain of evidence and motives of the parties involved is somehow a crazy crank idea. Subtle straw man type suggestion, there spanky.
It is possible that the DNC isn't saying anything on the advice of lawyers, or at the request of the FBI, CIA, NSA, military or other federal agencies, who are undoubtedly investigating the hell out of this. This was a cyber attack by a hostile foreign intelligence agency, not some script kiddies defacing a AOL web page, so there are going to be a lot of people looking into this.
It is also possible that the DNC is still trying to work out what is real and what isn't. A smart way to manipulate this sort of info is to leave 99% alone, and just change a few key things so there is an air of authenticity about it. It would take a little time to properly work out the dif of the two streams.
To be clear: I never said that the email isn't 100% authentic. I am just pointing out that only a truly stupid person wouldn't start asking a lot of questions about this info considering the source.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlcngdW2Ju4
But the emails had the EULA:
"The information contained in this message is intended solely for the individual to whom it is specifically and originally addressed. This message and its contents may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure or distribution, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly prohibited."
Why didn't the hackers distribute these?
But saying "It’s much more likely they’ll get something like ‘President’s Commission on the Celebration of Women in American History"" is not promising anybody a position.
So, I'm not sure how it's relevant.
These crimes were exposed by someone we don't like so much.
Best that the Hillary Haters (which is a family tradition in some cultures) could come up with is claiming violation of 18 U.S. Code  599.
Being the kind of people who don't need and don't care for actual facts as long as they think they fit their agenda - they are even quoting the wrong section.
18 U.S. Code  599 refers to CANDIDATES - not candidate's staff or candidate's party's staff.
But as they have such a hardon for Hillary, they are desperate to make something supposedly done by DNC automagically mean that it's an excuse for execution of Hillary.
What they SHOULD be quoting is section 600 - 18 U.S. Code  600.
Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Only problem is... at best, that would get them some people in the DNC that no one has ever heard of - not Hillary.
In reality, IT WOULD NOT GET THEM ANYONE cause it is NOT a crime - emails they are quoting prove so.
Key word is PROMISE. I.e. Give assurance of future events.
"IF you do this for me, I WILL do this for you."
Emails are AT BEST describing the exact opposite of that.
It's people ASKING FOR names of people to put on lists of potential nominees. And even that is not a certain nomination. They are LITERALLY asking for names of people who would they like to be CONSIDERED.
Any folks who you'd like to be considered to be on the board of (for example) USPS, NEA, NEH. Basically anyone who has a niche interest and might like to serve on the board of one of these orgs.
Not making promises. Looking for loyalists who have ALREADY pledged their loyalty.
"You DID stuff for me, MAYBE you'll be considered."
That's NOT a promise. At best it is compensation for past service... maybe...
And you can't legislate against that cause then the government would have to fire every government employee and dismantle every government program with every election.
Cause the fact that the candidate would be signing budgets, which pay for paychecks, of cops and judges, who have maintained law and order during candidate's past life - could be construed as compensation for past services.
And in the end, they are not even asking people directly - THEY ARE ASKING FOR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM OTHER PEOPLE!
They are asking for references for possible consideration.
So not only is it not a promise - it is not even a promise of a promise.
Casinos and lotteries make more direct promises than that.
But hey... screw that. Did you know that Hillary has a
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Then you didn't look very hard. We already know about the rigging, like not actually counting votes, coin flips that mysteriously all go Hillary's way, etc. They also talk about doing a fundraiser with the Washington Post even though their lawyers said no, they talk about putting donors into juicy positions, they talk about faking stories, leaking info from Sanders' campaign, etc. And that's ignoring the gross hypocrisy where they make fun of people based on their race, etc.
Who cares. What's really important is that Hillary is a crook.
This must have about the same amount of proof that Iraq still had WMDs! I mean, they've got something just as solid as the photos showing the portable weapons trailers, or the yellowcake purchases, or the....
Oh, it is a political accusation based on ". I'll accord this just slightly less credibility than that.
Now can we get back to actually talking about the corruption present in the DNC, or how sloppy whomever they contracted for IT is?
We do, however, have evidence in the leaked emails that when someone on Morning Joe makes them look bad, the Democrats will call the CEO and demand an apology and that the Washington Post was willing to do a secret fundraiser with them that their lawyers said no to.
So we do have evidence of media corruption, it just goes the other way. Interestingly, I have yet to see many stories about these leaked emails....
Bernie is not a democrat, so why would it surprise anyone that a independent trying to snag a democratic nomination might not be welcome by the democratic elite? OK, downvote away.
This is literally like shouting "Squirrel!"
The Dems have gone off their fucking nut.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
30k emails and only ONE had part of classification mark left in it. And it doesn't appear the classified fact itself was with it; just the marker (although the Bureau's language is vague on that). That's not a bad record. She should have said "don't recall seeing any", CYA language.
There's no evidence she intentionally skipped over some. The "recreated" ones not handed over with the original set appear to have been missed because the lawyers who helped her filter them did a quick-and-sloppy reading job, scanning only the intro. There was nothing in the content of these "missed" emails to suggest they were hidden/removed to hide the content. The missed ones were boring and generic.
It appears to be good old fashioned rush-jobs and slop. Not a conspiracy to hide stuff nor lie.
There's no evidence she knowingly received classified material. Again, she should have used CYA language and used the word "knowingly".
While working there, she should have also put in extra staff in place to monitor and verify classification compliance. Even if they couldn't work quick enough to keep up with rush-job projects, at least they could catch mistakes closer to the point of error and reprimand the offenders to reduce repeats.
She's a Type-A boss and probably pushed staff a bit harder than normal.
As far as CYA mistakes, she made similar per Benghazi when conveying the intelligence of the moment by not using words like "probably is" or "probably not", or "the best indication is that it was caused by an X", etc. Again, missing CYA language.
I don't know why she excludes standard CYA language. Perhaps she's often been accused of "acting too lawyerly" and compensates by making definitive statements. The cure is worse than the disease, though.
Table-ized A.I.
As with other info releases:
The point is NOT who released the information to the world. It is unimportant who released the information.
The point is that the information existed in the first place, showing the things group XYZ did.
But, no matter what group is affected, the policy of 'blow smoke up your butt' leads them to blame the messenger rather than correct their own behavior.
Even if Russia is responsible for the release, THE INFORMATION EXISTED FIRST.
Same thing with Snowden: he's blamed for showing the world the illegal activities of the US government.
Voting for the lesser of two evils still means you;re voting for evil.
Seriously - it's like saying "Oh, I'm voting for Stalin because that Hitler guy is just nasty...
You realize we sent Stalin a massive infusion of arms and armaments to help him keep fighting Hitler, and supported him despite his evil, right through V-E day? That we really preferred having Russian soldiers dying to having Americans dying, so we gave him all the help we could?
Yes, there was a strong feeling in certain circles that when the eastern front met the western front, the fighting would continue and we'd wind up in a war with the Russians. But still, we absolutely supported evil when it was fighting another evil.
Real lawyers write in C++
At this very moment, I would prefer the crazy, ugly, racist, misogyn, antimexican, etc., Mr. Ronald Grumpf that Ms. Killary Clintoris, She is craziest that Grumpf, psychopath, sociopath, and a crude assassin, which at least, until further notices, Mr. Grumpf is not, and he is a negotiator rather than a militarist. You Americans, must think that very well, because of your sons, husbands, brothers, they don't deserve to die in wars that are not yours.
Voting for the lesser of two evils still means you;re voting for evil.
My political opinions are so variant from the mainsteam that I've never had the privilege of voting for a candidate who represents the way I think or solve problems. Every election I've voted in has always been a case of choosing the least-worst candidate.
Frankly, the idea of not voting against the greater evil seems to be utterly brainless. Why would anybody knowingly let the greater evil win?
Seriously - it's like saying "Oh, I'm voting for Stalin because that Hitler guy is just nasty..."
First, you do know that the U.S. did ally with Stalin to defeat Hitler, right? Or does that piece of history just get glossed over these days?
Are you saying we shouldn't have?
And, second, the current candidates are really nothing like HItler nor Stalin. This is a Godwin's law reducto-ad-absurdum comparision, not relevant to the current election.
See it was all a Ruskie plot to destabilize America as we elect our great leader.. I for one welcome our new overlord..
A video edit comparing what Hillary Clinton claimed to what James Comey claimed after the FBI investigation highlights the distance between the two quite well and puts a fine point on the part where Comey says that if this had been anyone else who did what she did they might not get the same cushy response from the FBI she got.
And keep in mind that the US has very unclean hands here, according to Edward Snowden, former NSA contractor who would know what tools the NSA has available to look into this.
But of course the veracity of the documents leads us to the real story. Nobody claims the DNC emails were faked, just like nobody said the Snowden revelations were untrue. This helps us focus on what those documents show: Bernie Sanders was not lying to us when he said, "I told you a long time ago that theâ"that the DNC was not running a fair operation, that they were supporting Secretary Clinton.", and that he requests far too weak of a solution to remedy the problem (getting rid of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as chair of the DNC). And the emails show us that the DNC were telling amenable media outlets (such as NBC, if I recall correctly) which stories to not publish because they made someone they cared about look bad. Julian Assange's interview on Democracy Now is worth reading, it's quite revealing about how nasty the Clinton campaign is, sourcing the unnamed "experts" who told Robby Mook, Clinton campaign manager, that "Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these emails" and "are releasing these emails for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump".
Digital Citizen
A foreign government hacked US political party email in an attempt to influence an election and all people care about are the same old party insider bullshit that has happened forever in party politics. People may not like to hear this but a political party can select or favor whoever they want. People don't have to like it but it isn't illegal. Hell, people didn't even used to get to nominate before. I voted for Bernie in the primary but get over it already. He lost. Now it's time to keep the most unqualified lunatic from obtaining the most important and powerful position in the world. We can discuss how to change the political process later. Like it or not only two people have a chance to be President now. Avoid the potential disaster of Trump and at least we'll still have a shitty political process to fix.
Time makes more converts than reason
Are you a paid shill or do it for free? Post history is all Pro-Hillary and anti Trump. Amazing how that works.
WTF, not a She? How about Trans? LGBT? C'mon, why is it just HE?
Maybe more STEM?
The Russians want Trump to be President. That bears repeating a couple of times. Just think about why that might be.
'Bears' repeating? Lolololoolllffppfppfffffffttttss......Russians.....bears....hahahahahaha.....
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Well spoken. The real story here is that a Russian dictator is trying very hard to influence our election for his own ends. This should interest and/or worry people given Putin's apparent designs.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
So the communists support Trump and by voting for Trump you support communism. Now it all makes sense.
Candidate Trump is good!
So any hacker that uses an American computer, American VPN and can't speak Romanian automatically works for the US government? Is anyone seriously buying this argument?
Hey! Look over THERE!, { pay no attention to the CONTENT of all those emails }
Golly, maybe the guy who made that "Innocence of Muslims" YouTube video can be arrested again and thrown back in jail for another year....yeah....THAT's the TICKET!
Anything to keep the people from noticing all the puke and disonesty inside all those e-mails. If the DNC can just get through this fall and get Hillary securely ensconsed into the White House, then the world can go back to normal { where huge multi-national Wall St bankers get richer moving resources and labor around the worls as needed to keep pushing everybody else further down }. No actual reforms will ever be needed if only the bankers can get Hillary elected.
... any hacker goes through Russia or China. At least be original DNC...
Since everyone seems to have forgotten what was in the Manning leak on Wikileaks about Hillary Clinton this probably won't make make difference either despite what is in it.
any of the anti-gay, anti-black, anti-holocaust memorial, anti-Bernie etc stuff then you did not honestly look. even the usual big media companies found some of it and even found the attempt to trick Bernie into outing himself as an atheist so that the DNC could then trash him as an atheist in Kentucky.
you have to be seriously in the tank for hillary to not find any of this stuff. are you one of her paid trolls?
So says the company hired by the organization with Chelsea (you know, the stupid one) Clinton on the board of directors.
Everybody knows it's not the Russians. Wait for Wed's drop.
Hard to believe anything these days that's political or monetary.
That's the benefit of hindsight and also generally having a clue about Russia/USSR. If you read about the Yalta conference it becomes very clear that FDR had no clue about Russia/USSR and had utterly no idea that Stalin was evil despite a lot of advice from his own experts and plenty of warnings from Churchill.
One of the triggers for the cold war was clueless people in high places suddenly discovering with shock and feelings of betrayal that Stalin really was as bad as Churchill said he was.
So it seems that FDR and others were not doing a "lesser of two evils" thing due to not paying attention to advice about Stalin and just going by Stalin's personality. FDR really did think he was "good old Uncle Joe" who was hated just for being a communist by some eggheads who wouldn't know a great man if they shook his hand. That's what a focus on national issues and being surrounded by a group of like-minded folk you trust while keeping real experts at a distance gets you. He was the sort of guy that thought you could judge a man by his handshake and Stalin was very good at manipulating such people.
Trump is likely to be a hundred times more clueless.
Check their post history. You can't win against a paid shill, they get paid to lie over and over and over again.
I wonder if Donald Trump sits down and thinks: "So, the Russians want me to win. I wonder why...?"
So because he used a server and VPN in Russia he is an agent of the Russian gov't?
Is the server owned by Russian gov't or simply located within the Russian borders?
Isn't it reasonable that the VPN used to access the server in Russia is, uhm, Russian?
I'm confused, the third reason the attacker is an agent of the Russian gov't is because he can't speak Romanian? Doesn't the same report indicate that the source of the leaked emails was likely a group of hackers, not just one - which is it? The lone hacker that claims to be Romanian but can't speak Romanian OR a small group of hackers that work collectively under the name 'Guccifer 2.9'?
http://www.npr.org/2015/12/23/...
All told, a single donor can give more than $700,000 for the election.
That's serious money, according to campaign finance lawyer Brett Kappel.
He said, "It also shows you where campaign finance law has gone. We're now back in the era of soft money."
"Soft money" was the term for unregulated contributions to the party committees in the 1980s and '90s.
The soft money system led to corruption cases in both major parties, and Congress barred party committees from raising it in 2002.
But eight years later, the Supreme Court gave unregulated money a new path with Citizens United and other court decisions.
In a 2014 ruling in the case McCutcheon v. FEC, the Supreme Court elevated the importance of joint fundraising committees between campaigns and parties, such as the Hillary Victory Fund.
Campaign finance law had previously set an overarching limit on how much one person could give to federal candidates and the major parties â" combined â" in one election cycle.
In McCutcheon, the Supreme Court said that limit was unconstitutional.
As in other rulings, the court said removing the limit didn't raise questions of corruption.
You don't like that? Well, you can hop on your time machine and go and shoot down people responsible - two Bushes and a Reagan.
They appointed the guys who made it legal. Obama and Clinton appointed judges were against it.
http://www.npr.org/sections/th...
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down an overall cap on the amount that large campaign donors can give to parties and candidates in a two-year election cycle.
Chief Justice John Roberts led the opinion and was joined by justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito.
A separate but concurring opinion was written by Justice Clarence Thomas.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
tl:dr - They and the Reagan-Bush-Bush judges made it all perfectly legal.
Only "issue" at play is that Democrats are playing by Republican rules.
I.e. Acting like Republicans while talking like Democrats. Which they can't help - Republicans changed the rules of the game.
THAT is their problem, when facing their voters. But it is not illegal. Just immoral. You know... designed by Republicans.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
...to say "Vote Republican."
I.e. Vote Trump.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Political groups Majority (247)
Republican (247)
Minority (187)
Democratic (186)
And that's AFTER Republicans have done all they can to stall the Supreme Court nomination by Obama.
Why must Republicans always resort to stealing? Isn't lying (Hey! They're politicians. They have to lie to SOMEONE.) enough?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I would use multiple proxies and/or vpns all over the world if I were this guy.
Not only Russian VPN and dubious story about being Romanian but also this:
"The forensic evidence linking the DNC breach to known Russian operations is very strong. On June 20, two competing cybersecurity companies, Mandiant (part of FireEye) and Fidelis, confirmed CrowdStrike’s initial findings that Russian intelligence indeed hacked the DNC. The forensic evidence that links network breaches to known groups is solid: used and reused tools, methods, infrastructure, even unique encryption keys. For example: in late March the attackers registered a domain with a typo—misdepatrment[.]com—to look suspiciously like the company hired by the DNC to manage its network, MIS Department. They then linked this deceptive domain to a long-known APT 28 so-called X-Tunnel command-and-control IP address, 45.32.129[.]185.
One of the strongest pieces of evidence linking GRU to the DNC hack is the equivalent of identical fingerprints found in two burglarized buildings: a reused command-and-control address—176.31.112[.]10—that was hard coded in a piece of malware found both in the German parliament as well as on the DNC’s servers. Russian military intelligence was identified by the German domestic security agency BfV as the actor responsible for the Bundestag breach. The infrastructure behind the fake MIS Department domain was also linked to the Berlin intrusion through at least one other element, a shared SSL certificate. "
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_uk/read/all-signs-point-to-russia-being-behind-the-dnc-hack
lets ignore the lies she told and the proof of the corruption! heaven forbid we address the real issue!
First of all the title of the post isn't supported by the contents of it - there is no smoking gun proof especially if its from an IP block used for Russian scams. Secondly if Hitler films you robbing a bank, YOU ROBBED A BANK, it doesn't matter who provides the damning evidence. At no point has the DNC stated that the emails were fake so all we have is a game of "shoot the messenger" as a distraction from the obvious conspiracy to alter the outcome of the democratic primary.
The biggest take away is that the press has now had their appetite whet for these leaks and any subsequent batch will be pounced on as part of a narrative that the sympathetic pro-hillary media will be unable to suppress. I imagine sleepless nights for a few waiting for the other shoe to drop sometime before the election.
Can the leaked e-mails be trusted beyond doubt?
Can't someone change some words here and there to change the meaning of the mails?
Doesn't matter the messenger if the data itself is trustworthy by itself. If it isn't, the messenger trustworthiness must be checked.
I'm really in doubt here, haven't checked the way the e-mails where leaked, haven't searched if Clinton/DNC have questioned the content of the mails. But to answer your post title question, this would make the messenger's identity matter.
If I were in Russia trying to hide my identity I would first not use Russian computers and second not use a Russian VPN. I would have plenty of bot machines and IPs I could use instead. If I was part of a government propaganda section, I am sure I would also have no problem finding a partner who could speak Romanian. Could this be a reverse con by a pro-Hillary actor trying to create anti-Trump propaganda?
I am a Romanian and this article is absolutely retarded. The guy does speak native Romanian very well and the fact that he used VPNs or servers from Russia proves nothing. If I hack a server from US and buy a VPN with some bitcoins, does this make me an US backed hacker ?
Voters are getting way past tired of the "power structure" politicians.
In his first election, Obama was "none of the above", a stranger that was not known to be a corrupt pawn of the power brokers.
Hillery is the power structure's "strike back".
Trump is this election's "none of the above", and how !
Vote third party, every time. The powerful do look at how many votes they -didn't- get, and why.
And, vote for a change in all voting, to an "Approval Voting" system, where each voter gets one vote -for each candidate-. So you vote for all you can stand, and none that you can't stand. It would remove much of the power from the political parties. 8-)
First of all comparing either Hillary or Trump to Stalin or Hitler is a bit much. Neither of them are anywhere close. For specific example, Hitler had 6 million Jews killed, and Stalin killed 20 million land owners. To compare Hillary who may be a bit of a Wall Street shill, who will do little to change the status quo of wealth inequality, but may advance a few aspects of women;s rights is absurd. Likewise comparing the bombastic Trump who will say a lot of outrageous things, but will likely accomplish very little (other than be entertaining) in office should he manage to get there because there are plenty of democratic checks and balances is also a bit much. At most he could use is veto power to make sure even less is accomplished during his term.
As a side note, I wonder who people compared Stalin and Hitler to before there was Stalin and Hitler to compare people to?
"The Russians are coming, The Russians are coming, The Russians are coming" - Hillary Clinton Ironic, considering how much money the Clintons made off of selling State Department support for selling uranium mines to Russian concerns. The Uranium One sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Hillary Clinton.