Slashdot Mirror
Russian Group That Hacked DNC Used NSA Attack Code In Attack On Hotels (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A Russian government-sponsored group accused of hacking the Democratic National Committee last year has likely been infecting other targets of interest with the help of a potent Windows exploit developed by, and later stolen from, the National Security Agency, researchers said Friday. Eternal Blue, as the exploit is code-named, is one of scores of advanced NSA attacks that have been released over the past year by a mysterious group calling itself the Shadow Brokers. It was published in April in the group's most damaging release to date. Its ability to spread from computer to computer without any user action was the engine that allowed the WCry ransomware worm, which appropriated the leaked exploit, to shut down computers worldwide in May. Eternal Blue also played a role in the spread of NotPetya, a follow-on worm that caused major disruptions in June. Now, researchers at security firm FireEye say they're moderately confident the Russian hacking group known as Fancy Bear, APT 28, and other names has also used Eternal Blue, this time in a campaign that targeted people of interest as they connected to hotel Wi-Fi networks. In July, the campaign started using Eternal Blue to spread from computer to computer inside various staff and guest networks, company researchers Lindsay Smith and Ben Read wrote in a blog post. While the researchers didn't directly observe those attacks being used to infect guest computers connected to the network, they said a related campaign from last year used the control of hotel Wi-Fi services to obtain login credentials from guest devices.
His name is Seth Rich. But you probably know him as Russia.
All while the CNN fact-checks the president during Korean negotiations: "no, no, Trump lied, our nukes are actually old and weak, and not modernized as he claimed."
Headline: Russian Group that hacked the DNC...
First Sentence: A Russian government-sponsored group accused of hacking the Democratic National Committee...
Did they hack it, or are they accused of hacking it?
It's bitztream the autism-hating, custom EpiPen-hating, Musk-hating, Qualcomm-hating, Firefox tabs-hating Slashdot troll!
I'm not a Trump supporter, but this submission headline is really shitty and deceptive.
Here's what it currently is, in case the editors do get off of their asses and fix it:
There's no "alleged" or "accused" or "thought to have" in there. It's stating that some vague, unnamed Russian group did engage in some sort of an attack. It's stating it as if it has been proven, when it hasn't been.
But the first goddamn sentence of the summary contradicts that by at least indicating there's only an accusation so far [emphasis added]:
Fix this shit up, /. editors. It just gives fuel to the pro-Trump crowd when you make stupid and sloppy mistakes like this.
The NSA has known for decades that computing systems using a model of ambient authority are insecure. It is my theory that they have promoted this model to allow them to make their work easier. If the worlds computers managed resources in the same manner we manage money, electricity, or any other scarce resource, almost none of this would have happened, and Trillions would have been saved.
A Russian government-sponsored group accused of hacking the Democratic National Committee last year
You can just stop right there. I have been following the news coverage on everything to do with Russia and from what I have seen there is absolutely nothing worth mentioning regarding any connection between the Russians and the DNC or any other Democrat politician or candidate. The DNC was not hacked and what they did with torpedoing the Sanders campaign and colluding^W coordinating with the Clinton campaign during the debate run-ups was perfectly legitimate and in fact done in a spirit of patriotism.
Now, the Russians and the Republicans are a real problem and a threat to the security of the United States. In fact, Trump and Putin have a weekly phone call where they plan how best perpetrate the downfall of the United States. We should not get distracted and stay focused on the real issue. The evidence is out there and we just have to be patient, like we were with Benghazi.
Note: in case your sarcasm filter is on the blink, this was meant to be sarcastic.
There is zero evidence that there was a hack on the DNC. None. Nada. Zippo.
Furthermore, the DNC has refused to allow access to their servers suggesting that there is a great deal of "politics" involved in the claim.
And we know via Wikileaks' Podesta emails that the DNC had a leak problem.
Additionally, Assange has said that the leaker was American, and suggested that it was an insider. He also strongly suggested that insider was Seth Rich -- the technical/systems director for the DNC. (Which would make sense).
The Russian hacking narrative has all but been debunked and the onus of proof is on those who continue to make the claim.
Lack of oversight and a complete inability to keep their own exploits out of the hands of criminals and foreign powers is the exact reason we should be shuttering the doors on this nonsense. Its far better for everyone in the long run to patch exploits instead of hoarding them and turning them into a tool to undermine the very safety and security of the nation they were "meant" to protect. This exact same issue applies to back doors on encryption or secure systems of any kind. No one will probably care until the entire economy crashes after a back door exploit leaks out on financial transactions.
This is the interweb. Driving clicks is what matters. Turn off the adblock and see what shit pops up on Slashdot - like that Taboola clickbait shit nonsense.
Turn it back on and see the other ads that stick around.
Our comments just fed into their business model, btw.
Your ONLY recourse is just stop coming to this website.
Actually, ALL websites that have this news aggregation commenting shit are garbage. It's a complete waste of time, does nothing to inform us, and the commenting is just folks shouting at each other. It's just appealing to our little lizzard parts of our brain that gets a bit of a dopamine hit when we comment - maybe get modded up - and flagellate our little egos.
Most of the web has devolved to the lowest common denominator - Slashdot included. And it's amazing that they haven't gotten rid of AC posting - isn't it? (HINT: It has NOTHING to do with allowing anonymous voices.)
So, stop coming or suck it up.
What I don't get about this whole "Russia" narrative is why the fuck the leftists can't provide any evidence or proof.
It has been, what, almost 8 months since Trump was inaugurated. It has been about 10 months since he was elected. That's plenty of time for some real evidence to be presented.
Yet all we get are questionable accusations from leftist talking heads.
Where is the goddamn evidence?! Where is the goddamn proof?!
More and more this is looking like a "Boy-who-thinks-he's-a-girl-and-surgically-alters-his-genitalia Cries Wolf" situation with these leftists.
Please, provide some quality evidence or quality proof of these accusations!
If this problem were as serious as the leftists claim it is, assuming it even actually exists, then they should have no problem providing us with boatloads of solid, unquestionable evidence and proof.
Yet they can't even provide us with the flimsiest of evidence or proof! That's how bad the situation now is: even half-assed, questionable evidence would be better than the unsubstantiated accusations they're throwing around now.
Fun fact, not only is it not proven that Russia hacked the DNC. There isn't a SINGLE witness who has analysed the DNC hacked servers that is willing to say Russia did it while under oath.
Thats right kiddies. Not only have they not shown proof, but they don't have a single expert willing to say it happened. I know you think the FBI and NSA are on it, but under oath Comey said the FBI did not look at DNC servers and only Crowdstrike did, and Crowdstrike is now unwilling to say Russia did it. When asked why he thought Russia did it, I shit you not, Comey replied "It just makes sense". Yep, even Comey knows its a lie.
fuck failing slashdot, i don't need to read this crap.
So why do you read it?
Last I heard, reading Slashdot was voluntary. Clue: you can even read some threads and not others! 8-)
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Here is the analysis that that article is based on. Looks pretty legit.
Do you really, really believe this "Russian Hacker" narrative? In which case your judgement on any and every other politically tinged story here is more than suspect. Or are you spreading this fake Russian news at the behest of a higher editorial dictate? I have slightly more respect for an unwitting pawn than I have for a fool. I think...
Witness BitZtream getting pwned!... twice.....three times!
Isn't this headline extremely disingenuously now that there's been a report confirming it was an internal leak?
We have to put up with your climate change stuff. The least you can do is to suck it up for an occasional Russian hacker story.
Have gnu, will travel.
Because the US media made the accusation in the first place while all evidence points in the other direction. There is no evidence the Russians were even involved much less that they run this particular hacker collective.
The claim that an NSA exploit was used but the NSA exploit wasn't even released until earlier this year. So either the NSA aided and abetted the "Russians" or the story is just spin.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Here is Adam Carter's evidence and analysis that The Nation article is based on. It's pretty damned legit.
inb4 "The Nation is part of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" posts.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Your points are well taken. The fundamental facts of the whole Russia hacked the DNC narrative have never been questioned or put under scrutiny. There are many reasons for this, the primary one being that most of the media is a mouthpiece for the Democratic party. One can laugh at that, but this is the sort of shit that happens when a democracy does not have a free and fair press.
All you have are accusations from the DNC, of course!
And an odd refusal on the DNC's part to allow the FBI to ever even touch the infrastructure in question. The only people who've had their hands on the server from which the information was copied were hired (and reliably partisan) consultants who scrubbed for malware and insist it must have been a hack. The people clinging to "Trump and the Russians hacked the DNC!" have reached the laughably delusional stage of this. Well, it would be laughable if the consequences of this phony narrative - as it relates to wasted hours and tax dollars when there are real things to work on - weren't actually a serious matter. All of this is meant to distract from why the Democrats have been steadily losing political power for years now - and confronting that head on is so uncomfortable for that establishment that they actually are more comfortable being demonstrably unhinged, in public, at a completely delusional level. It would be fascinating if it weren't so ugly.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I would never impugn The Nation, though I don't have to agree with every contributor.
Patrick Lawrence is the author of Somebody Else’s Century: East and West in a Post-Western World, Time No Longer: America After the American Century, and After Exceptionalism, and his columns for Salon and The Nation quite consistently praise the East and Russia and attack the West, Liberals, and "Imperialists" . From the initial reports of the DNC hack he's been putting out articles that it was an inside job and claiming the "RUSSIAN HACKER CONSPIRACY" was just an attempt by the DNC and Liberal elites to restart the Cold War in a new militarist Clinton administration.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, and I don't attempt to discredit Mr. Lawrence. Western democracy has flaws, and it's important to have counterpoint and criticism. However, I feel he's somewhat too biased on this subject to take his claims at face value. Let the investigation run its course; don't jump to conclusions for the sake of talking heads.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
No, you are incorrect. The DNC leaks had not to do with a spear phishing attack. You are confusing these events with the leak of John Podesta's personal gmail account which is alleged to be the result of a spear phishing attack.
1) No one is alleging that an insider used a spear phishing attacks to obtain the DNC materials that were leaked. You are confused.
2. Outside of Google Fiber, 200Mbps was not obtainable in the US in mid 2016, and Google Fiber was not available in Washington DC where the DNC servers were located. Even if this connection speed was obtainable, it is impossible to send and recieve 2 GB of data over a VPN, across the Atlantic and Western Europe in 87 seconds. You know as well as anyone else that connection speed != actual transfer speeds. Show me anyone that has actually achieved 23MBps in that scenario, I dare you.
3. No one is claiming they did, other than you. And if Russia did, that does not mean they hacked DNC and leaked info. Without evidence it is only a weak allegation.
Fake news. Somebody here is feeding an agenda, not searching for the truth.
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
You can't sit there and claim I said things I didn't.
Clearly, you did not look at the analysis presented in the supplied link.
Really this is all a cover up for the real scandal which is that the Hillary camp stole the nomination from Bernie.
I don't know why the simple math of the nomination process befuddles so many people so greatly. Hillary won more states in the primaries and caucuses. That is how you win the nomination.
Fact is that the Dems got split by a corrupt primary
What was corrupt about it? People showed up and voted in the primaries and caucuses. Many precincts around the country had record high turnouts. Many states where the primaries and caucuses tend to not matter at all (due to being too late in the order) had competitive votes and did matter.
Bernie did not get as many people out to the vote in the primaries and caucuses as Hillary did. End of story.
serially weak candidate
She was orders of magnitude more qualified for the position, though simultaneously likely the only candidate on the planet capable of losing to Donald Trump. Hillary herself ended up being her own worst enemy as she - by being Hillary Clinton - drove many conservatives to go vote because they didn't want her (or really, her husband) to be in the white house (again). Republicans went out in droves holding their noses about how much they despised voting for a pathological liar with three failed marriages, voting only to prevent the election of the spouse of a democrat who they have been programmed for decades to hate with a passion far exceeding the hottest of stars.
If the dems actually thought they were getting elections stolen from them, they'd be the ones pushing election reform. That they're the ones resisting reform makes it very clear their assertions are insincere.
The republicans are not pushing election reform in any real way. The republicans are pushing to reform voting, with a specific interest in restricting voting. Election reform would be an interest in actually bringing a wider array of viable candidates to the voters, and the GOP has less than zero interest in that.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Your points are well taken. The fundamental facts of the whole Russia hacked the DNC narrative have never been questioned or put under scrutiny. There are many reasons for this, the primary one being that most of the media is a mouthpiece for the Democratic party. One can laugh at that, but this is the sort of shit that happens when a democracy does not have a free and fair press.
Actually the narrative is questioned, which is why you see the allegation come out and vanish almost as quickly. The narrative will be repeated and repeated until people get tired of pushing back and we end up with white washed history.
Repeat a lie long enough and loud enough and eventually the people will believe it. Not an exact quote of Goebbels, Mussolini, Stalin, Lenin, Pot, Mao, etc.. but the basic premise of their propaganda machines.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
AFAIK the results of the FBI raid on Manasfort's home have not been publicly revealed. *I* sure don't know what they found, and I don't believe you do either.
I find Trump's public actions to be consistent with the claim that he was sponsored in some way by Russia. But given his personality that's not proof that he was. He has long had worship attitude towards dictators and tyrants, so it could just be hero worship. Neither choice causes me to thing better of him. There was speculation before the election that Russia had blackmail material on him, but my feeling was that given his actions during the campaign I couldn't imagine what possible blackmail material there could be. He didn't seem to be ashamed of any action...and the weird thing is neither were his supporters.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
That's an amazing link you posted. Thank you very much for sharing it. Do you have any other sources that you'd recommend I look at on this issue or any other? Just an amazing link. Thank you again.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
The DNC has NEVER given its server over to anyone in our government to investigate. They have refused every request. So all we have is the moderate-confidence of a "private" company( CrowdStrike ), that the RUSSIANS did it. This whole Russian thing is a BULLSHIT distraction. But STUPID people think the Russians hacked/colluded our election just so we could find out that the DNC and Clinton(Foundation) are a bunch of crooks... Yeah, that makes sense. What makes sense, is that someone who worked for the DNC who saw all of the corruption going on with the DNC/Clintons, LEAKED the emails to bring it into the light. That persons name is mostly likely Seth Rich and unlike this whole Russian-BULLSHIT-narritve/Conspiracy-Theory, there's actual evidence which points to him as the source and that makes him a hero.
I'm not sure if you're being sincere or sarcastic. But yes, I can provide a link to forensicator's analysis, which was the other source that was used for the article. He deals mostly with the issue of transfer speeds and why it's doesn't appear to be possible to transmit as fast as the DNC did.
There were a series of allegations by the Bernie campaign... one is information was being leaked by the DNC from the Bernie Campaign to Hillary. I could go get a list of these things if you want. There was a lot of shady shit about the Hillary campaign.
Stuff in this for example:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
As to her qualifications, her popularity figures, ability to speak publicly, her charisma which is relevant to people wanting to win an election, etc... none of it was very good. But whatever... run her again... maybe third time is the charm!
As to republicans restricting voting, justify that please. As to election reform, no it would not be about candidates... it is about ensuring the integrity of the ballot box. The allegation is that people are fiddling with the votes. Apparently the Dems like the "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" approach to investigation. Which is naturally the best way to accomplish nothing on reform, find nothing, and frankly facilitate any existing corruption.
But that's okay... Even if you do nothing to reform the process, some kind of light is being shown on this at least privately and there is an increasing probability that corruption will be discovered eventually... and whoever is doing it will pay an embarrassing price in elections to come. All of which could be avoided by being serious about reform... but we might get much the same simply by catching people's hand in the cookie jar.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Sorry use this one.
When message threads get flooded with posts echoing a single narrative with the same flawed arguments, I call it brigading because that's what it is: An attempt to artificially create a 'consensus' so that dissenters are not heard, dismissed as fringe elements, or discouraged to the point of self-censorship.
As far as the evidence goes, the blogger did good forensic work, but finding conclusions from something like this is a Rorschach test; it's easy to see what we want to see. We fall into logical fallacies, like "If I was Alice, I would choose to do X, Y, and Z. Because the attacker did not do X, Y, and Z, the attacker must not be Alice", then turn right around and commit more: "Because I can tweak my theory to fit most of the current evidence, it must be correct."
My personal take is that none of the evidence is sufficient proof of the "hacker's" identity, but whoever did it was quite lazy. If they were trying to hide their fingerprints, they did a singularly bad job of it. That by itself leans me slightly toward the 'Russia' theory: The DNC would have a lot more to lose if their supposed conspiracy (complete with murder) was unmasked, while Russia would lose nothing but a little international respect they didn't have to begin with. It would also be signature Putin, who has a history of dumping this kind of half-assed 'evidence' because it distracts an already polarized public and sets them to arguing with each other over facts and details. Then, in the confusion, Putin does whatever he wants. Remember the war in Ukraine?
Of course, it's pure conjecture, and I wouldn't put money either way. But I don't have to, because nobody is forcing us to accept a 'narrative'. There's an investigation in progress. It's non-partisan. The investigators have far more resources and access to far more information than some random blogger. Let them do their job, and when they present their case with all its evidence, decide for yourself.
If anyone is trying to force you to take sides now, it's probably because they're afraid of what will come out later.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Did the NSA not have a tool that signs malware with the code of known groups as a way of implicating them and not the NSA? This tool simply existing calls into question pretty much any "hacker group did such and such". Unless that group claims responsibility, then we can't be really sure who did what.
I just have one single question for people who say the DNC has been hacked by Russians. If Russian hacking is the case, then why has the DNC absolutely refused, for over a year, to allow their servers to be examined by ANY law enforcement authority or even ANY authority beyond their own outside consultants? I mean, if Russia hacked our election and installed a manchurian candidate, and we should be removing this guy at 'all costs' -- why can't anyone obtain any evidence at all from the DNC hack? Can ANYONE answer this for me?
I don't understand why everyone is so focused on consumer home internet connection speeds. What evidence is there that the hack originated from a machine using Comcast, Verizon, whatever, and not say, a university network? I had a connection far faster than any home internet even as an undergrad in a dorm. Or a machine at the ISP itself? Or are we talking about the DNCs connection to the outside world? Was it on consumer-grade internet; not hosted in a datacenter with a fat pipe? I don't think it was the Russians either but connection speed is hardly proof.
Quite sincere, thanks for your link. :)
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I have yet to see anyone show that it is possible to transfer 2 gigabytes of data in 87 seconds or less via VPN, from DC to Romania, using any type of connection.
For all those people that continue to use Windows, really how bad does it have to get before you finally switch to something better/more secure?
it's kinda like climate change. Yes, they are technically accused, just like climate change is technically a theory, in the sense that every expert in the field who isn't a paid shill agrees: they hacked the DNC and yes, our planet it getting warmer. So yes, a proper journalistic source wouldn't have run with a headline like that. But /. is a lot of things, and a proper source of journalism isn't one of them. That's why /. links articles instead of writing them.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
How's life in the hypocrite lane?
Really poor form to play the DNC themed challenge, quite clearly the "It's all Russia's fault" is a joint scam of the DNC and the RNC, well at least establishment deep staters working both sides of the aisle. That is the real problem, this crap is clearly coming out from Republicans and Democrats and as Republican are the clear political majority across the board, this is their scam in reality, they are in control and working hand in hand with corporate Democrats. Clearly the neocons and the neolibs are one in the same, just different costumes, colours and mascots.
You have emphatic proof of this. Where are the prosecutions of clearly corrupt Democrats by the clear majority Republicans, none what so ever, why are the Republicans actively protecting the Democrats and attacking Trump. Clearly the corporate Republicans and the corporate Democrats are one in the same and are colluding with each other to profit from the corruption of the democracy they pretend to represent and protecting each other from prosecution for that corruption.
You can not politically attack the corporate Democrats without taking on the corporate Republicans who are blatantly protecting the corrupt Democrats from prosecution because the corporate Republicans know they will be next.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Where are the prosecutions of clearly corrupt Democrats by the clear majority Republicans
Which democrats in particular would you like to be prosecuted?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Yeah, doesn't sound like Trump at all.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
There were a series of allegations by the Bernie campaign... one is information was being leaked by the DNC from the Bernie Campaign to Hillary
That is all that there was ... allegations. People can level all the allegations they want. At the end of the day Hillary received more votes than Bernie and in so doing she earned the nomination. The primaries and caucuses are run by the individual precincts within the districts within the states. The DNC does not have a way to manipulate those results as they are counted by the precincts.
Have you seen Bernie himself level any complaints against the process? No, because he understands how it works. He didn't get as many voters out to earn the nomination as she did. It doesn't matter if DNC leaders personally liked one candidate over another, they only get one vote.
As to her qualifications
There was no better qualified candidate in the 2016 election cycle, period. It is debatable whether there was a viable less qualified candidate than Trump in the 2016 cycle, but neither party put up a candidate who was better qualified than Hillary. You can disagree with her on whatever you like or dislike her for whatever reason you like but there is no contesting her qualifications.
ability to speak publicly
She is a vastly better public speaker than Trump. Trump frequently ends up giving us incomplete and incoherent sentences in his speeches, and has a terrible grasp of facts and reality.
As to republicans restricting voting, justify that please.
Which supreme court gerrymandering case would you like to start with? Those are both republican led efforts at voter suppression. Which state attempting to re-institute Jim Crow laws would you like to discuss after that? That is also something that comes exclusively from the GOP.
it is about ensuring the integrity of the ballot box.
Can you show even a single substantiated case of fraudulent voting in the 2016 election? You can tell me about dead people on the rolls but can you show a case of a dead person actually voting? You can tell me about people registered in multiple districts but can you show them actually voting in multiple districts?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Have you seen Bernie himself level any complaints against the process? No, because he understands how it works. He didn't get as many voters out to earn the nomination as she did. It doesn't matter if DNC leaders personally liked one candidate over another, they only get one vote.
He did draw attention to the problem of superdelegates, most of which were lined up for Clinton before the primaries even started. Despite the media repeatedly being told not to report unpledged delegates in the totals they kept doing so anyway, and this made it look like Clinton had a greater lead than she actually did.
CIA is not a Private Security Firm.
The fundamental facts of the whole Russia hacked the DNC narrative have never been questioned or put under scrutiny. .
Except for Trump's CIA and FBI and NSA that is!
Show me.
Nothing like a 2 second google search, unless you are a rightard convinced any proof that you don't like is "Fake news" that is.
for all the rational world I think you should heed the words "Stuff it"!!
Have you seen Bernie himself level any complaints against the process? No, because he understands how it works. He didn't get as many voters out to earn the nomination as she did. It doesn't matter if DNC leaders personally liked one candidate over another, they only get one vote.
He did draw attention to the problem of superdelegates
The superdelegates ultimately made no difference in the nomination; if there were none at all Hillary still would have won the nomination. There is a definite argument for them being generally un-democratic but they did not change the outcome of the nominating process.
Despite the media repeatedly being told not to report unpledged delegates in the totals they kept doing so anyway, and this made it look like Clinton had a greater lead than she actually did.
I saw plenty of media outlets reporting both with and without the superdelegate totals. My state was moderately late in the process and the superdelegate numbers did not discourage any voters I knew from going to the caucus.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
'ER', all the ones who have broken the law, same as for the Republicans, just as for all corrupt politicians all over the Globe? I want to see all corrupt politicians across the entire globe prosecuted and just as cool to start with corrupt US Democrats as anyone else ;).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
So your argument is that the republicans are trying to gerrrymander with Voter ID laws?...
Integrity. Think about it.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I have no idea how you reached that conclusion by reading my comment.
The GOP uses gerrymandering and voter restriction in parallel. The latter is what they sell under "voter ID" and "election integrity" mantras, though ultimately they have the same effect as they both aspire to disenfranchise voters and minimize - or complete cancel - the value of a single vote from people who would ordinarily not vote GOP. As we've seen time and time again when the popular vote is counted the GOP seldom wins, they have to resort to underhanded measures in order to build power.
If a party's message is that toxic to the American pubic that they can only enact it by cheating, then the problem is not with the voters who are voting against it.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
So your argument is that only the GOP gerrymanders?
You clearly didn't work on that integrity thing... tragic.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I am becoming less convinced that the work attributed to "Fancy Bear, APT 28" are in fact Russian. We've already exposed NSA/CIA as acting in disguise as foreign entities.
The irony, is for all the talk of Russian interference. We have done the exact thing in Russia's elections and dozens of other nations. We're the biggest hypocrites. Lastly, the majority of hacking and election tampering was done by the DNC to impede Bernie Sanders and prevent him from winning the nomination.
You do realize that there has been no independent verification of any data in the paid-for report right? No law enforcement agency, not the FBI (not in CIAs jurisdiction), has been allowed to review any information used to create the report.
Saying that the report looks right assumes that the facts are correct, and that is where law enforcement agencies have no such verification. That is why the FBI requested, and to my knowledge still has an open request, to examine the DNC servers.
So again, could they be right? Sure but I want to see the independent verification. Politicians are nasty people and there has been so much illegal and immoral activity exposed over the last few years that we should all be demanding independent verification.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Can you provide a single example of democrat designed gerrymandering since the 2010 census? You can talk about historical examples prior but they are of little to no consequence for the current population of critters in congress.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
That analysis has been questioned by several. In fact the nation that did a story on it is now reviewing their own story for accuracy. There are just too many unknowns and holes in their report. https://www.washingtonpost.com... https://www.techdirt.com/artic... https://www.aol.com/article/ne... http://thehill.com/policy/cybe...
That analysis has been questioned by several. In fact the nation that did a story on it is now reviewing their own story for accuracy. There are just too many unknowns and holes in their report. https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com] https://www.techdirt.com/artic... [techdirt.com] https://www.aol.com/article/ne... [aol.com] http://thehill.com/policy/cybe... [thehill.com]
If the the lefty media is now running fact checks, they must feel threatened. I trust my own knowledge and instincts. That report is legit. There are some people that have a lot of explaining to do.