Slashdot Mirror
Special Counsel Mueller Charges 12 Russian Intelligence Officers With Hacking Democrats During 2016 Election (cnbc.com)
Special counsel Robert Mueller has obtained a new indictment charging 12 Russian intelligence officers with hacking Democrats to interfere with the 2016 presidential election, and with stealing information of about 500,000 American voters, the Justice Department announced Friday. From a report: The indictment lodged in Washington, D.C., accuses the Russian spies of hacking into the Democratic National Committee and the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, and of releasing emails obtained from that cybersnooping with a a goal of influencing the election. The accused also hacked into state boards of elections, secretaries of state, and into companies that provided software used to administer elections, according to Deputy Attorney Rod Rosenstein. Rosenstein said he briefed President Donald Trump about the case earlier in the week.
The mountain gave birth to a mouse.
And by "hacking" we mean - sent a phishing email asking to verify passwords that somebody at the DNC responded to.
Note also the same "Russian Hackerz" tried this with the RNC too but nobody bit.
I'm sure Russia will be falling over themselves to round these guys up and turn them over to the U.S. We can hold a trial in absentia to help make us feel better, but these individuals will never see the inside of a courtroom unless they are paying a parking fine in Mother Russia.
If any part of this case relies on the examination of the DNC servers by Crowdstrike then any half competent attorney could take it apart.
1. The server will need to be provided for examination by defense experts.
2. The chain of custody is non-existent.
No server, no evidence. No evidence, no conviction. Even then the lack of any chain of custody calls into question the quality if any evidence found on it.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Rosenstien added details from the podium ...
There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime.
There is no allegation the conspiracy changed the vote count or affected any election results.
I remember downloading the Guccifer 2.0 doc cache and looking at the Office metadata (e.g., in the XML). Most of the metadata was wiped, but there were some odd Cyrillic additions and font references scattered about as if some Russian had opened the docs and copied them back.
It would be nice to know what else was used to follow the trail here...
And counting. Seems to be going quite well to me. Let's not forget how long Watergate took, and that was just some schmucks at a hotel and not a hostile Foreign power run by ex KGB...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I've been wondering lately whether I'm the subject of cognitive dissonance.
If you follow Scott Adams, he talks about cognitive dissonance as two people watching the same movie and seeing different plots. When called to describe the plots, the two views are wildly different, sometimes polar opposite.
And so for many people Trump is a racist, blowing a dog whistle that racists and liberals can hear clearly. For others, Trump is a practical leader doing what's best for the nation.
Which is the correct view? At this point, probably no one knows - there's no unbiased source of information. Best we can do is get unbiased statistics and raw facts (such as immigration numbers, unemployment, reputable polling) and come to our own conclusions.
Which brings me to the Mueller investigation, which I have always believed to be based on nothing. It seems perfectly obvious that the *amount* of Russian involvement in the election is well into the noise - to the tune of something like $13 million over several months, compared to $3 billion (-ish, depends on what you count) spent by Clinton and Trump.
Am I (and half the country) dismissing something important because of cognitive dissonance?
We might just find out.
The Mueller indictments will be based on evidence which can be examined, and accuses specific Russians of hacking and leaking the DNC through wikileaks.
On the other side, Julian Assange has stated several times that the leaks didn't come from Russia. Julian never identified the actual leaks, speculation has it that it was Seth Rich.
Julian Assange is a sufficiently trustworthy source not to be dismissed out of hand, and the US justice system should allow the evidence to be combed through by the media.
This could turn out to be a good touch-stone for validating one side of the cognitive dissonance claim.
I look forward to the public investigations of the evidence.
It will be good to finally see which movie we're actually watching.
Damn, you caught'em. Please relay your theory to Fox News, they love that sort of thing.
How's the weather in St. Petersburg today? Do the people you work with still call it Leningrad?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Um, no. That's just a, what's that word? Oh, yeah, a LIE. In the course of "conducting espionage" against Russian intelligence operatives OPERATING IN THE US, the FBI recorded the Russians talking to Carter Page, Trump's foreign policy advisor, who they had previous evidence of collaborating with Russian Intelligence. But that's nothing to get suspicious about, right? No reason to follow up on that, right?
Ii there's any substance to this, it's more likely that the Kremlin didn't want Hillary as president than they wanted Donald. Hillary's an aggressive war mongerer who'll try to push NATO further east, while Donald's a buffoon who's reducing the USA's diplomatic credibility in the world. Sounds like the Kremlin, if they did do this, did the rest of the world a favour.
I'm sure you're pretty close to it. Russia saw Donald as a weak man they could easily manipulate by guiding his ego. Of all the candidates running for any party- Donald was the one most likely to destroy America's relationships with other countries and weaken America's position in the world.
It was really a smart move by Putin. For the many bad things you can say about Putin, you can't call him stupid.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
> carry one phone.
That's a BS excuse. Even my old second generation iPhone from 2008 supported multiple email accounts.https://politics.slashdot.org/story/18/07/13/1629245/special-counsel-mueller-charges-12-russian-intelligence-officers-with-hacking-democrats-during-2016-election.
32 people were charged. 12 of those were GRU (russian) agents. 3 were trump campaign personell. Article does not say who/what the others are.
?! wrong.
from zerohedge with screen shot of indictment -
"... there is no indication that any American was a knowing participant in this activity, and no indication that these efforts altered the vote count in any way."
https://www.zerohedge.com/site...
No one indicted so far needed the Special Counsel to be indicted... None of the indictments implicate Trump in any wrong-doing either.
That you are biased is obvious. That you are so biased, the above truths aren't clear to you, is rare...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
It is important to include all relevant facts.
Peter Strozk, the FBI boss in the news for saying he would "stop Trump" from becoming President, was the person who paid Stefan Halper as an FBI informant and placed him inside the Trump campaign.
Stefan Halper then used his influence inside the campaign to recommend and hire Carter Page, who is now accused of being a Russian spy.
So the trail of facts seems to show a very very different story.
1. FBI's boss (Peter Strozk) hires a mole
2. FBI place mole inside Trump campaign (due to fear of russia)
3. FBI Mole recommends and hires a Russian spy (Carter Page)
4. FBI gets warrants to spy on campaign based on Russian spy "infiltrating" the campaign - Peter Strozk (see 1) leads the investigation
5. Opponents claim Trump colluded with Russians and deny FBI bias.
If Occam's razor can provide a better way to interpret these facts, please share.
No COLLUSION By Any US Citizen
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
it is justice department press release about justice department's indictment of russian agents.
comment i was replying to, said there were "trump campaign personell" charged. that was wrong, as i said. do you agree i am right on that?
and justice department is specific "no indication that any American was a knowing participant in this activity,"
and could you point to pages in indictment where it names americans knowingly "working with those that committed crimes", as you imply it does.
you are free to speculate about future indictments with or (as in your case) without facts.
same way, someone else may speculate, you and i, will be indicted in future as russian saboteurs of slashdot threads. lol.
You mean Prigozhin's company, Concord Consulting? That's still proceeding to trial.
This is different and involves a bunch of GRU officers.
"Russian GRU officers hacked the website of a state election board and stole information about 500,000 voters," Rosenstein said. "They also hacked into computers of a company that supplied software used to verify voter registration information."
The defendants worked for two units of the GRU that "engaged in active cyber operations to interfere in the 2016 presidential elections," Rosenstein said. One unit stole information using spearfishing schemes and hacked into computer networks where they "installed malicious software that allowed them to spy on users and capture keystrokes, take screenshots and exfiltrate or remove data from those computers."
While your statement is factually correct the narrative to which the submitter is reference is the "Trump-Russia Collusion" narrative. People want it to be true to get rid of Trump. These are all publicly available in indictments.
Papadopoulos - Perjury
Flynn - Perjury
Manafort & Gates - Falsified income tax filings and bank fraud.
Pinedo - Identity Fraud
van der Zwaan - Perjury
Only Pinedo, has anything to do with Russian involvement and that has to do with him selling some of the fraud services to the Russians. Pinedo wasn't involved with Trump's campaign. Each of the indictments of individuals associated with the Trump campaign have nothing to do with the operations of the Trump campaign or even involve the Russians.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
If I ever had a mod point to give, then I might give you one on the grounds that it's the only visible mention of "hackers" in this discussion.
In general, I was not made happy by the lack of "funny" comments, even though it's a serious topic with little room for humor. However, it was more saddening to see the dominance of the discussion by obvious trolls and sock puppets. Does it call for a review of the ontology of lies? Or a new ontology of trolls?
The so-called victory of #PresidentTweety was razor thin. What that actually means is that each and EVERY group that can plausibly claim to have influenced about 80,000 voters has an equally plausible claim to be the margin of Trump's residency in the "dump", as he described the White House. Actually, you could argue for 40,000 if they were voters swung away from Hillary and over to Trump.
There are strong and credible evaluations (including some bipartisan ones) that strongly indicate that the tactics of Putin's goons influenced at least that many suckers among the millions of voters they targeted. Ergo, it's rather hard to deny that Trump owes Putin, but it's only a question of degree. My assessment is that Trump is much more beholden to Mike Pence for delivering the votes of the religious lunatics.
Or perhaps it's more significant that the US government is almost surely more guilty of interfering in elections than the Russians? If money does translate into votes, then it would be a sure call. Do you know how much of the Marshall Plan funding was actually diverted to the CIA? And how much of that dark money was used for meddling in elections in places like Italy and Japan?
Still, it feels worse when our own ox has been gored. It might be worse in this case only because of the old KGB kompromat on Trump that Putin inherited. (I still think the Golden Shower rumor is a clever feint created by Putin to make his puppet feel safer.)
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Hillary Clinton lost to an incompetent businessman who had (and has) no idea of how to be President of the United States. She's that bad.
...or the Russians are that good.
If Occam's razor can provide a better way to interpret these facts, please share.
Ok:
FBI announces in late 2016 that they have an active investigation into the Trump campaign working with Russia to affect the election.
That would toss the election to Clinton, since it was pretty close. And it would be really, really easy for the FBI to do if they actually were out to sabotage Trump. Just a press release, like the multiple press releases they sent out for their investigation into Clinton.
Instead, the FBI announced the investigation into Clinton's emails, including a big announcement reviving it in October. The FBI didn't talk about the investigation into the Trump campaign, and actively turned the press away from it by claiming the investigation didn't involve the Trump campaign.
That would be a really bad idea if they were actually out to get Trump.....but it doesn't fit the narrative so the imbalance in press releases somehow doesn't get included when you talk about including all facts.
Are you limiting your scope to the latest indictments? Because people like Manafort and Papadopoulos have already been indicted by Mueller, and some have pled guilty. The scope of his investigation is very large. It's also not over, and he's actually able to control his people so there aren't any leaks, we have no idea what evidence he has or who his other targets are. The only information we get from Mueller is when he files things in court. So it's probably premature for anyone to conclude anything other than what his filings say. Just because there has not been a filing charging someone with collusion, for example, does not mean that there is no collusion or that he's not investigating it or that he doesn't have evidence of it. He just hasn't filed that yet, so let's hold off on making conclusions about what people definitely did or did not do until he finishes his work.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
I believe the correct spelling of your name should be Arkhangelsk. But, really, feel free to keep linking to a site actively trying to discredit an ongoing investigation into Russians trying to subvert the democratic processes of the US. Let's just act like that's not happening, because that's totally patriotic and in all of our best interests, right?
Really, it's becoming so tiresome that so many people in the US apparently don't want to know whether and how Russia is trying to influence our country at the highest levels. These people seem to love Donald Trump more than they love the US, and it's really weird to see.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
What have the FBI, the NSA, and the rest of our wonderful "intelligence" apparatus been doing, while this was going on?
Oh, yeah, they were busy trying to sabotage Trump
Strzok sat on evidence incriminating Trump campaign members in connection with Russian election interference -- and didn't publish it. And Comey basically threw the election to Trump by reopening the Clinton investigation in late October. That's some strange behaviour for people supposedly trying to "sabotage Trump".
That's because Trump continues to campaign. Continuing to hold political rallies even in off years is rare to see in democratic republics.
My apologies. I erred when crafting that sentence. I made the assumption that the sentence would be interpreted in the context of the Russian collusion narrative, which is that Trump owes his Presidency to the Russians.
Papadopolous's indictment features a number of false statements regarding attempting to reach out to Russian contacts. The indictment contains no evidence of Papadopolous's statements being much more than an indication that he attempted to arrange a meeting between Trump and the Russian government as well as obtain the alleged hacked Clinton emails. If anything, the indictment goes to prove just how little Papadopolous managed to accomplish. In the end he never got the emails and there was no meeting arranged between the Russians and Trump or his campaign.
Flynn, which I had accidently posted Manafort's indictment also spoke with Russians. Flynn did contact with Russians but contact was also tangential to the collusion narrative. The indictments don't contain specifics but Flynn may have done no more than communicated the preferences of the Trump Presidential Transition Team to the Russians or other nations and encourage them to keep in mind the incoming administration when voting on a UN resolution. Flynn's perjury charges almost certain arose out of a desire to avoid any potential Logan Act prosecution, something that would be a very interesting case to watch come through the pipes with regard to the authority that will be assumed and has been preemptived bestowed on the President-elect via an election.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
While your statement is factually correct the narrative to which the submitter is reference is the "Trump-Russia Collusion" narrative. People want it to be true to get rid of Trump. These are all publicly available in indictments.
Papadopoulos - Perjury
His perjury was about a meeting on Clinton's emails that he had with a man whom he knew to be connected to the Russian government.
Flynn - Perjury
Perjury about his phone conversations with the Russian ambassador.
Manafort & Gates - Falsified income tax filings and bank fraud.
Hiding income that they got working for a Russia-backed politician in Ukraine and other Russian interests.
Only Pinedo, has anything to do with Russian involvement and that has to do with him selling some of the fraud services to the Russians. Pinedo wasn't involved with Trump's campaign. Each of the indictments of individuals associated with the Trump campaign have nothing to do with the operations of the Trump campaign or even involve the Russians.
It's surprising that you went to the trouble to link to the indictments that actually contradict your claims.
I mean Papadopoulous, while on the campaign, met with a Russian connected individual to get information on emails that would damage Clinton.
What possible definition of "with the operations of the Trump campaign or even involve the Russians" does that not satisfy?
I stole this Sig
if you've got evidence then why can't you go to trial?
Because people are running their mouths and actually don't have evidence.
I know I know... bluster and hummms and hahs... take it to court or its just hot air.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I don't think these attacks on the EC are well justified because the founders were quite clear that one of the main purposes of the EC was to prevent presidents like Trump, whose only campaign tactic is to make mobs angry. The entire notion of "faithless elector" would be anathema to them, because the electors were NOT supposed to be chained to the voters. If the EC was working as intended, Trump is EXACTLY the president they wanted to prevent.
Perhaps a secret ballot in the EC would help? I really think that a lot of the electors might have voted against Trump if they had been able to do so. Given the dislike of Hillary (regardless of whether that dislike was legitimate or ginned up), it is quite possible the EC would also have been unable to vote for her. In that case, they would have had to fall back on the other mechanisms for picking a president, and they certainly could not have found a worse president than #PresidentTweety.
Just a footnote, but don't forget that they wanted a system that would confer strong legitimacy, something like a mandate to lead, after strongly contested elections. I rather wish that they had been able to innovate all the way to a parliamentary system instead of creating such a winner-take-all system.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
People who live in reality don't have to rationalize anything. We just accept what is happening and truth. That truth being, Trump is doing a good job. No amount of "rationalization" by people with TDS will change that.
Of course by living in reality if Trump stops doing a good job we will accept that too.
As for his tweets, I don't see why anyone really pays attention to them. Well they are good at setting TDS people to frothing. When like the mythical nuclear war that didn't happen they have conquered up another boogie man when that didn't work out. They specter of a trade war. Which, to give them credit as a better chance of happening but not likely.
See here is what really happened. Trump stated that the trade deals between friends and allies was unfair. Like his NATO comments, that also pissed everyone off, he is of course correct. Like the nuclear comments this has sent the left off in a tizzy spouting 'Trade War! Trade War!" Which like the earlier nuclear war that didn't happen, this will probably not happen ether.
Would you like to know why? Sure you would. Because both sides, again like in the case of the nuclear war that didn't happen, know that a trade war would benefit no one. So here is what will happen. People that actually know what they are doing will get together. They will hammer out some agreements, then the politicians, like Trump will come in and take credit.
There. Is that all clear now? Now that, that is settled lets get on with more important conversations.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
If this is the actual case, "Russia saw Donald as a weak man they could easily manipulate by guiding his ego," (and I believe it is) then you can say many things about Democrats, but you can't call them smart, effective, or mature.
Controlling someone who has their over-inflated ego attached to a very specific self image, and is incredibly eager to present that self image in public, is easy. You appeal to that nature, couch your desires in terms of how it will reinforce the image they want to portray. Play to their ego, mention their legacy, compliment them on possessing those positive traits, and show them how a specific course of action will prove to everyone they possess those positive traits Imply or present scenarios where inaction or action other than what you desire would be detrimental to the image they want to portray or even better, would be seen as evidence their desired image is a fraud. If you are successful, which is incredibly easy if you are mature enough to focus on results rather than your own childish impotent rage, your enemy will bend over backward and crab-walk over fire to show everyone who they are and in the process do exactly what you want.
Democrats have really overdone the second part, impugning his character, saying he's a fraud, a racist, a sexist, a NAZI, a traitor, a heartless ignoramus, etc. They missed the whole first part though, and as such have missed every opportunity to manipulate this man into doing their bidding. They are so emotionally overwrought they have become completely ineffective at politics. It is they, not Trump, who are their own worst enemy. By definition this makes them, as a group, not as intelligent as Trump.
It also makes Putin their political, emotional, and intellectual superior by a huge margin. No wonder they fear him so much. They are incapable of following where his mind goes, impotent to control their actions the way he does, and so helplessly addicted to outbursts of infantile outrage they can't stop, even if doing so meant they could control the White House after a lost election.
If that's not an indictment of the negative effects of partisanship and how it destroys the minds, power, and agency of those who continue to practice it, I don't know what is.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
There is what I was waiting for..
Not only do those suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) suffer from the ability to separate fantasy from reality, it also clouds their ability to carry on a rational discussion. This should be evident. The subject was incensed by by a factual statement but was unable to refute it. The subject continued to get more agitated as more facts where placed in front of him. Facts that while true, didn't fit with the subjects world view as viewed under the effect of TDS.
The final straw for the subject came when these facts where combined with a rational projection of what will probably happen. Unable to refute these facts and a rational projection that didn't fit with the subjects world view he was driven into a rage (frothing.) This is common result of trying to engage subjects under the effect of TDS.
As clearly seen by the subjects last post in this thread it should be clear that the subject has lost all contact with reality where it comes to a successful Trump presidency. At this point there is nothing more to be gained by continuing to engage such subjects. Medical intervention is usually required after this point.
Any questions?
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Truth hurts. You decided to get personal, I just decided to distance myself from you. You didn't come here to debate, you came to argue. If I can't educate you, I'll educate people that are reading.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Your trail of "facts" would be compelling if they were true, but they are not. Carter Page was part of the Trump team since at least March 2016 when he was identified by Trump as a foreign policy consultant. Halper was never part of the Trump team and didn't meet Page until July 2016. So I don't know how you think Halper was responsible for Page getting hired by Trump.