Slashdot Mirror


White House Supports Claim Putin Directed US Election Hack (bbc.com)

The White House is suggesting that Russian President Vladimir Putin was directly involved in a hacking operation aimed at interfering with the U.S. presidential election. BBC reports: Ben Rhodes, adviser to President Barack Obama, said that Mr Putin maintains tight control on government operations, which suggests that he was aware. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest added that it was "pretty obvious" that Mr Putin was involved. "Everything we know about how Russia operates and how Putin controls that government would suggest that, again, when you're talking about a significant cyber intrusion like this, we're talking about the highest levels of government," Mr Rhodes said. "And ultimately, Vladimir Putin is the official responsible for the actions of the Russian government." NBC reported that the U.S. had evidence that Mr Putin personally directed how information hacked by Russian intelligence was leaked. The Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence also released a statement asserting Russia had orchestrated the hack, including breaches on the Democratic National Committee and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The contents of those hacks, passed to Wikileaks and posted online, were embarrassing to the Democrats and shook up the presidential campaign. The NBC report, which cited two unnamed senior officials, said the hacking campaign began as a "vendetta" against Mrs Clinton before becoming "an effort to show corruption in American politics and split off key American allies." Mr Putin is said to have been furious when Mrs Clinton, as secretary of state, questioned the integrity of 2011 parliamentary elections in Russia. He publicly accused her of encouraging street protests.

7 of 715 comments (clear)

  1. "Suggesting" ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... nothing of substance here.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:"Suggesting" ... by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But the Watergate burglars were caught. We have no evidence Russia did squat. And even if we did, okay, what do you want to do about it? Anoint Clinton to spite Russia? Go to war with Russia because Podesta can't spot a fucking phishing email?

      How about instead, 1) don't do shady shit you wouldn't want the electorate finding out about like getting the debate questions early from the news network, and 2) practice better computer security.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    2. Re:"Suggesting" ... by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that what the CIA is stating is that Russia broke into both the DNC and RNC, but only choose to release the info from the DNC.

      You know, you guys, you very well could be the next target. And Russia isn't the only country learning whether or not they can get away with stuff like this. Do you think China would be above doing likewise? Iran? North Korea?

      --
      Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
  2. Re:Why won't they just show their proof? by guruevi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Also today: CIA and NSA brass has refused to testify in front of congress as to the facts of these allegations. The narrative being pushed into the media and the very circumstantial evidence together with the "just trust us, we are the good guys" makes it seem very fishy. Clinton has indicated she wants to steer into another Cold War, her surprise loss to Trump sent the industrial complex into a frenzy trying to force the hands of both Russia and US.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  3. The Russians didn't... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Russians didn't:
    - Game the DNC system against Bernie
    - Keep Clinton from campaigning in the midwest
    - Cause Clinton to collapse into a van
    - Keep Clinton away from the press for most of the campaign
    - Make Clinton call half the country rude names
    - Force Clinton to set up a shitty little email server
    - Tell Clinton's campaign manager that it's OK to click on "legitimate" phishing emails

    Have to agree with Barack when he said, "The 1980's are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War's been over for 20 years." My money is still on a (non-Russian) pissed-off Bernie-backer as the real Wikileaks connection - most of the grey+ hats I know were quite #neverclinton.

  4. If you talk about Putin and Russia by pecosdave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but don't mention anything to do with George Soros or middle eastern donations to the Clinton campaign you're playing partisan politics.

    If you talk about Russia influencing the elections by releasing harmful Clinton emails but never mention the contents of those emails and what it means, you're playing partisan politics.

    If you talk about everything above you're having a rational discussion, but having the typical towing the party line headline like this one you're just showing what side you're on.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  5. Re:Shocking by rleibman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could it be
    C) The democrats chose their candidate poorly and Trump winning had not much to do with Obama and more to do with Hillary?
    P.S. Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.