View Full Version : So what's the deal with this whole Russia/election thing?
Have any of y'all been able to extract any "facts" from the rather large quantity of "news" out there?
What's it all mean?
What should be done?
catherine
12-12-16, 7:04pm
It's like something out of a 1960s James Bond movie. I don't get it, either. Seems incredible. Some say there should be an independent investigation.
It's like something out of a 1960s James Bond movie. I don't get it, either. Seems incredible. Some say there should be an independent investigation.
I think it's feeling more like Spy vs. Spy from Mad Magazine.
I say leaker, not hacker, but that is based on sheer intuition.
DocHolliday
12-12-16, 9:25pm
I'd like to see some "facts" as well. Otherwise it just appears to me to be another attempt to scapegoat someone or something else. So far the list consists of the Russians, James Comey, "fake" news, white women with "internalized misogyny", the Bernie Bros... Have I missed anything?
Sarah Palin's email got hacked by a college kid!
Trust but verify.
iris lilies
12-12-16, 9:40pm
This thread is so funny because I had been thinking about asking bae to comment on this issue, put it in perspective.
I cannot wade into it all, "cannot" because I might shoot myself. In the head. if I start to go down that bunny trail.
But because my local large city newspaper made it their headline this morning, and they are not a tabloid (althoughn they ARE excessively liberal), I think I had better pay some attention to this issue, I just dont know how much attention to pay and to whom.
Zoe Girl
12-12-16, 10:49pm
I know there is an electoral college issue, most years this is that. Then there was some Russian issue of hacking emails of the DNC. But I have not seen anything linking this to rigging the election or anything else. I am so confused, it makes me want to make up crazy James Bond stories but this year someone might believe me!!
So there is a Russian secret gazillionaire who wants even more money and power, and maybe a magic reindeer with killer antlers. She (we have to get with the times ya know) decides to infiltrate the brain of an American kinda famous, kinda jerky guy with midichlorians (let's bring in the Star Wars crowd). The goal is to control him to do her bidding, politically and sexually of course. Then he does not turn out to be good looking for one part, and he also is not well liked enough to win on his own so she has toxic mind control chemicals put in the water. The only problem is that select people in the electoral college are actually all related and have a special immunity, so they question this.
That's all I got
I need more information, too. Trump has made so many negative and intimidating comments about the media, both generally and specifically, that I can imagine they are looking for chances to get back and may even feel a threat to freedom of the press. I have to wonder if Trump and the media are at extremes and reality is somewhere in between. It sure got a lot of publicity today.
What ever it is, he may be driving the same wedge between he and the CIA as he has done with the press. I wouldn't want the CIA mad at me.
A better political quote I've seen, "I don't know if my liver can take four years of this."
flowerseverywhere
12-12-16, 11:49pm
This morning I would have said the journalists were again being sidetracked from covering the real stories. But as the day has progressed you see no one backing down.
Pbs had an interesting story today. BBC has interesting coverage but it is more than Trump.
It's hard to get facts from today's media environment. From what I've been able to discern, the hacks to the DNC servers originated in Russia but there are no direct links to the Russian Government. The CIA says that Putin was trying to undermine Hillary and favored Trump, but the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence say no motive can be determined.
The first observable hacks to the DNC occurred last year, well before the primaries were over, which makes one wonder how anyone could say they were designed to benefit Trump. Some pundits are saying that Russia usurped the Democratic process, allowing Trump to win, although I've not heard of a single instance where a vote was changed as a result.
I tend to think Russia was trying to embarrass the current administration and it's favored party, forcing the Democrats to attempt turning it to their advantage by implying nefarious activities or collusion by Trump. The question is, who's going to win the propaganda war? In my heart, I'm afraid the Democrats and the media's speculation will win out as I don't think most people are interested in facts.
It's hard to get facts from today's media environment. From what I've been able to discern, the hacks to the DNC servers originated in Russia but there are no direct links to the Russian Government. The CIA says that Putin was trying to undermine Hillary and favored Trump, but the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence say no motive can be determined.
The first observable hacks to the DNC occurred last year, well before the primaries were over, which makes one wonder how anyone could say they were designed to benefit Trump. Some pundits are saying that Russia usurped the Democratic process, allowing Trump to win, although I've not heard of a single instance where a vote was changed as a result.
I tend to think Russia was trying to embarrass the current administration and it's favored party, forcing the Democrats to attempt turning it to their advantage by implying nefarious activities or collusion by Trump. The question is, who's going to win the propaganda war? In my heart, I'm afraid the Democrats and the media's speculation will win out as I don't think most people are interested in facts.
You could argue that the earlier hacks/leaks were aimed at helping Bernie.
Now I'm hearing it claimed that the Clinton campaign is asking for intelligence briefings for Electors. I doubt there's enough there to spark an Electoral College Coup, but this has been a strange year all round.
I mostly agree, Alan. It will be a very weak case to question the election legitimacy without more information. It may have changed people's minds about how they voted, and maybe not. Hard to say. The bigger issue is that Russia was somehow messing with out election campaigns. That's not right and deserves a full investigation.
Supposedly our intelligence agencies are certain that the RNC got hacked as well but that information was either not shared with wikileaks, or wikileaks didn't publish it. My concern, if that's true, is that there might have been some truly damning info about trump in there which could now be used to blackmail him.
iris lilies
12-13-16, 11:30am
It's hard to get facts from today's media environment. From what I've been able to discern, the hacks to the DNC servers originated in Russia but there are no direct links to the Russian Government. The CIA says that Putin was trying to undermine Hillary and favored Trump, but the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence say no motive can be determined.
The first observable hacks to the DNC occurred last year, well before the primaries were over, which makes one wonder how anyone could say they were designed to benefit Trump. Some pundits are saying that Russia usurped the Democratic process, allowing Trump to win, although I've not heard of a single instance where a vote was changed as a result.
I tend to think Russia was trying to embarrass the current administration and it's favored party, forcing the Democrats to attempt turning it to their advantage by implying nefarious activities or collusion by Trump. The question is, who's going to win the propaganda war? In my heart, I'm afraid the Democrats and the media's speculation will win out as I don't think most people are interested in facts.
Thanks Alan, that is a good summary.
Roger's larger point is right, wtf that The Russians are messing about in our elections. But as for the minutia, its not revealing of anything.
ToomuchStuff
12-13-16, 11:49am
So what news has interviewed anyone that has been proven in a court, that was involved in the hack, about their motives?
Heck, if Russia itself, really hacked the DNC, countries typically play long games, with multiple motives and goals (who can they bribe or what blackmail could they use to get more info. Could they get a Russian hooker/spy, to get information from someone, before she gets caught, put in Playboy, and brought home, etc).
Then you have the possibility of hackers doing stuff why hackers do (to see if they can), and then who can they sell that information to, and how can that benefit them?
As far as cyber space goes, how can any of this kind of thing ever be stopped? It could keep everyone spinning forever.......
interesting story in wapo, john Bolton and "false flags"
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bolton-suggests-russian-election-hacks-were-%E2%80%98false-flag%E2%80%99-by-obama-administration/ar-AAlsjxh?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp
As far as cyber space goes, how can any of this kind of thing ever be stopped? It could keep everyone spinning forever.......
consistent use of encryption for everything.
Here is one analysis of the current situation.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-russia-mcconnell-1.3893237
Quotes:
As the Senate majority leader announced Monday that a bipartisan panel would investigate Russia's suspected meddling in the U.S. election, the timing of his principled call for a review seemed a bit rich to some observers.
"The Russians are not our friends," McConnell told reporters at a year-end news briefing.
He added that he trusted the CIA's evidence of Russian snooping with the "highest confidence," a clear break from president-elect Donald Trump's dismissal of the spy agency's findings...
Weeks before election night, McConnell was reportedly among a "gang of 12" top lawmakers summoned to a secret conclave to review U.S. spy agency intelligence on cyber-intrusions. The conclusion: Russian cyber-incursions were threatening the integrity of the elections by seeking to tilt the outcome in Trump's favour.
When presented with the findings, the Post says, only the Democrats privy to the information agreed to shine a bipartisan light on the allegations of Russian interference. Some Republicans, including McConnell, apparently doubted the validity of the data and were reluctant to join a call-out...
Meanwhile, Trump continues to publicly discredit the intelligence apparatus he's about to inherit, says Henry Hale, who teaches courses on Russian politics at George Washington University.
'Destroying the trust between yourself as president and the critical national security apparatus doesn't strike me as smart.'
- Thomas Graham, Russian affairs specialist
The tiff sets up a "dangerous precedent" that "could come back to bite him" when it matters, Hale says, such as if his administration ever needs to fall back on the credibility of CIA intelligence to sell the American public on taking action against an imminent overseas threat. There's also always the possibility the same Russian hackers could pull the trigger on leaking documents damaging to Trump.
As far as cyber space goes, how can any of this kind of thing ever be stopped?
For most of us, a workable solution might be avoiding using email for illegal or manifestly stupid communications.
For most of us, a workable solution might be avoiding using email for illegal or manifestly stupid communications.
But it seems that even the most secure sites can be hacked by someone just a little smarter.
But it seems that even the most secure sites can be hacked by someone just a little smarter.
I think your mistake is believing that most sites are secure. True end to end encrypted communication between strangers is a hassle. Read about Glenn Greenwald's efforts at implementing encryption before Snowden would communicate with him to get an idea of what's involved. Most of what we consider 'secure' is actually only 'secure enough for its purpose'.
ToomuchStuff
12-13-16, 1:21pm
There is a thing called TOR. It stands for The Onion Router. A few years back, a newstory was out about a US embassy, who did an improper install/securing job, and all their communications, were being sent in readable form.
Then the government put out a bootable Linux distro called LPS. This was in part, so no evidence would be left, where most could access it, and in part to fix the TOR issues. I did find it interesting that Snowden didn't use that distro, but used Tails instead (makes me wonder what sites LPR communicates through).
Then we had the story about how Silk Road was busted, and it uses TOR.
The encryption program, used by many, that was considered to be one of the best (Truecrypt), was suddenly shutdown a few years ago. There was speculation that this had to do with a National Security Letter, as well as speculation that a quantum computer was successfully made, and all of our current software security, was obsoleted.
Secrets and software have limited lifespans.
iris lilies
12-13-16, 1:24pm
For most of us, a workable solution might be avoiding using email for illegal or manifestly stupid communications.
Just yesterday I called in information on a sensitive community garden issue, rather than taking my usual route of emailing. I didnt want my words preserved forever in text.
I went to dinner with James Clapper and John Brennan just a few days before the election.
I used to work with some of the 3-letter agencies, on math-related things. My wife with another of the 3-letter agencies, on catching-bad-guys-and-taking-their-stuff things.
I have no clue what's going on, or who is doing what to whom, or what their ultimate goals are. I have some *theories*, but I've not seen any real published data or verifiable sources so far.
And in today's "news" environment, the media accounts seem...precious.
Thanks, I wanted to ask you because I thought you would know, so it is interesting that you are feeling the way you are. I too have theories, but they are just that, based on sheer intuition and nothing more.
I think "precious" is a good word for it.
ToomuchStuff
12-13-16, 3:07pm
Where is the golum picture?
Or is this the "isn't that precious" picture, when you mean, you little sh**.:laff:
Where is the golum picture?
Or is this the "isn't that precious" picture, when you mean, you little sh**.:laff:
http://i.imgur.com/TcDzUV4.jpg
ToomuchStuff
12-13-16, 3:18pm
This one makes me laugh.http://www.simplelivingforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=1669&stc=1
More and more, I am realizing that it's all smoke and mirrors. Whoever tells the biggest lie over the loudest bullhorn--over and over--wins. The big lie gambit is especially noticeable to me in areas where I have done my research, but I'm sure it works equally well in all disciplines. And what with "truthiness," it's really easy to just throw up your hands--or put them over your ears--and give up. Is anthropocentric global warming real? It would seem so, but scientific consensus has been spectacularly wrong before (see Semmelweis, Ancel Keys). I liked that line about "I don't know if my liver can take this." I suppose it's too late for me to take up drinking...
http://www.newyorker.com/cartoons/a20602
iris lilies
12-13-16, 6:36pm
The Russians lurking in our cyberspace DID bring us one of Trump's funnier lines, the one where he asked them to please release all of Hillary's emails. I laughed over that one.
I wonder what kind of lurking our spooks are doing in digital political conversations around the world. I guess ours are scarier than Russian spooks because I fancy they are better at it, if even only slightly. And yes, I wouldnt want to be on their wrong side if Trump.
Item forwarded to me by a friend under the subject line "Sauce for the gander":
Latin Americans relish the irony that Russia may have installed a right-wing puppet government in the U.S.
Dec 16, 2016 | CuencaHighLife |
Editor’s note: The Latin American media are taking perverse delight in the prospect that Russian espionage may have played a role in last month’s election of Donald Trump as president of the U.S. For decades, U.S. resources were used to install right-wing puppet presidents in Latin America. Versions of the following satire have appeared in the press and on websites throughout Latin America.
By Quentin D Fortesqueue
Thousands of people are feared dead in Central and Latin America this week after literally laughing their heads off at the news that the CIA is complaining that Russia may have rigged the US election and installed a right wing puppet dictator.[https://www.cuencahighlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/chl-opinion-logo1-300x57.jpg]
With global irony reserves critically low this comes as yet another blow to the global satire industry.
We approached Manuel Noriega, the former CIA stooge, intelligence asset, gun runner and cocaine smuggler who mysteriously became the President of Panama in 1983, and asked him what he thought of the allegations. He said from his prison cell:
“Ahahahahahahaha. Haaaaaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaaaaa!”
[https://www.cuencahighlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/chl-kissinger-382x300.jpg]
U.S.’s Henry Kissinger with Chile’s General Pinochet.
Unable to get any sense from Seņor Noriega we went to Chile where the CIA installed General Pinochet in 1973. We asked the wife of Eugenio Berrios, the biochemist who invented black cocaine, who was assassinated by Pinochet to cover up the use of Sarin Gas and anthrax against political opponents, what she thought of the rumors.
“Good one. Haaaaaa hahaha. Honestly don’t. Hoo hoo hoo. I can’t breathe. Seriously get help. Hahahahaha. It’s too funny. Haaaa.”
We were unable to get any sense from anybody in Iraq, the Congo, Venezuela, Brazil or the Philippines as they were too busy laughing themselves stupid.
That's hilarious, MaryHu. And probably pretty close to the truth.
We have a history of influencing foreign elections for our own gain.
The laugh's on us this time.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.