PDA

View Full Version : Russian hacking of the US election



Leo
10-12-2016, 07:12 PM
didn't want this to get lost within the all-encompassing trump thread. it's incredible that this actually happened, so much distracting craziness in the election that it really hasn't received the spotlight that it should. i mean, c'mon, fucking russia directly meddled in and influenced the american election...call me naive but, yikes!

certainly deserves the attention now that the CIA has officially issued a statement:

Russian Hackers Acted to Aid Trump in Election, U.S. Says


American intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump, according to senior administration officials.

They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/us/obama-russia-election-hack.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

and trump's predictable reaction:

Trump, Mocking Claim That Russia Hacked Election, at Odds with G.O.P.


An extraordinary breach has emerged between President-elect Donald J. Trump and the national security establishment, with Mr. Trump mocking American intelligence assessments that Russia interfered in the election on his behalf, and top Republicans vowing investigations into Kremlin activities.

Mr. Trump, in a statement issued by his transition team on Friday evening, expressed complete disbelief in the intelligence agencies’ assessments. “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,” Mr. Trump’s team said, adding that the election was over and that it was time to “move on.”

Though Mr. Trump has wasted no time in antagonizing the agencies, to carry out priorities like combating terrorism and deterring cyberattacks he will have to rely on them for the sort of espionage activities and analysis that they spend more than $70 billion a year to perform.

At this point in a transition, a president-elect is usually delving into intelligence he has never before seen and learning about C.I.A. and National Security Agency abilities. But Mr. Trump, who has taken intelligence briefings only sporadically, is questioning not only analytic conclusions, but also their underlying facts.

“To have the president-elect of the United States simply reject the fact-based narrative that the intelligence community puts together because it conflicts with his a priori assumptions — wow,” said Michael V. Hayden, who was the director of the N.S.A. and later the C.I.A. under President George W. Bush.

With the partisan emotions on both sides — Mr. Trump’s supporters see a plot to undermine his presidency, and Hillary Clinton’s supporters see a conspiracy to keep her from the presidency — the result is an environment in which even those basic facts become the basis for dispute.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/us/politics/trump-mocking-claim-that-russia-hacked-election-at-odds-with-gop.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

droid
11-12-2016, 09:45 PM
DCAT filing treason charges against Trump, Comey, Giuliani and McConnell.

luka
11-12-2016, 10:16 PM
Irrelevant in the scheme of things imo

Leo
12-12-2016, 12:57 AM
some things have always gone on behind the scenes, this is incredibly brazen and scarier when you take into account trump's ego and how putin knows exactly how to stroke it and play him. this has global consequences, pretty damn relevant, i'd say.

Mr. Tea
12-12-2016, 07:40 AM
Absolutely. Is there a precedent for this in modern history? Makes 'hanging chad' look tame by comparison, if true.

luka
12-12-2016, 09:15 AM
Lol r u joking?

luka
12-12-2016, 09:16 AM
Has a sovereign state ever intefered with the democratic process in another sovereign state? Can't be serious

luka
12-12-2016, 09:21 AM
This story may well be partially true but could just as easily be cover for increasing the funding for cyberwar in the US, enlarging it's scope, and intensifying it's operations as well as smearing wikileaks in the process. I doubt we'll ever know.

What we can say without a great deal of doubt, is that no one is about to rerun the election on the back of this. Trump will still be sitting on the throne.

Mr. Tea
12-12-2016, 09:22 AM
Has a sovereign state ever intefered with the democratic process in another sovereign state? Can't be serious

Has RUSSIA ever interfered with an AMERICAN election. I'm aware there are other countries in the world.

luka
12-12-2016, 09:24 AM
Obviously not what you meant.

droid
12-12-2016, 11:34 AM
The irony is immense of course. Interfering with elections and installing right wing governments is the CIA's job. They practically invented it.

Mr. Tea
12-12-2016, 12:53 PM
Obviously not what you meant.

Good job I've got you to look inside my brain and tell me what I really meant, isn't it. :rolleyes:

Leo
12-12-2016, 02:02 PM
no one is suggesting a reversal of election result. it's a big deal because it's the combination of it happening, for once, TO american (instead of BY america to someone else) coupled with trump's apparent disregard of evidence from his country's own intelligence services on the matter.

sadmanbarty
08-01-2017, 11:51 PM
Russia spreading fake news and forged docs in Sweden: report

http://www.thelocal.se/20170107/swedish-think-tank-details-russian-disinformation-in-new-study

vimothy
09-01-2017, 11:23 AM
Re: "Russian hacking", one thing I have trouble understanding is why the CIA would want to publicise it.

luka
09-01-2017, 11:41 AM
normalise cyber warfare. justify funding.

vimothy
09-01-2017, 11:47 AM
Do they really need to do either of those things?

Publicising evidence Russia tampered with the election is obviously harmful to its legitimacy and that of the government so it seems strange that they would do so even (perhaps especially) if it were true.

luka
09-01-2017, 11:54 AM
Well let's think of something else then. Together we should be able to come up with something.

luka
09-01-2017, 11:59 AM
One theory doing the rounds is that Trump is the figurehead of a military/naval intelligence takeover

luka
09-01-2017, 12:00 PM
That a different branch of the deep state has mounted a kind of coup in which the CIA is the loser

droid
09-01-2017, 12:01 PM
Its also strange that the head of the FBI would make an election changing non-announcement 2 weeks before polls open.

Its almost as if there are competing interests in the political/intelligence/military establishments.

sadmanbarty
09-01-2017, 12:08 PM
Re: "Russian hacking", one thing I have trouble understanding is why the CIA would want to publicise it.

If they didn't publicise it, they'd run the risk of someone leaking it (believing it to be in the public interest). If the democrats and the public at large found out that the CIA were sitting on evidence of Russian hacking, which may have influenced the election results, many would see this as evidence of partisanship. This may in turn have consequences for the CIA (funding, firings, etc.).

firefinga
09-01-2017, 12:08 PM
Do they really need to do either of those things?

Publicising evidence Russia tampered with the election is obviously harmful to its legitimacy and that of the government so it seems strange that they would do so even (perhaps especially) if it were true.

No, it's as Luka said. Don't forget, these are first and foremost bureaucracies where certain key figures fight for power and influence. That's usually best done via money/fundling.

luka
09-01-2017, 12:12 PM
The question is a kind of Rorschach test, which is why it's a great question.

firefinga
09-01-2017, 12:14 PM
Never underestimate the possibility of a cabal going on, too. If there's a security problem somehwere, soenone is responsible, and that certain smeone may be the enemy of somebody else etc. Career driven sniping...

firefinga
09-01-2017, 12:18 PM
One theory doing the rounds is that Trump is the figurehead of a military/naval intelligence takeover

steve Bannon, former Navy ... there you have it :fire:

Mr. Tea
09-01-2017, 12:24 PM
I know this is hardly the main point here, but has anyone else noticed the quaint language invariably used in news reports on hacking, Wikileaks and so on?


Kragh also mentions a fake telegram which suggested that former Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt might be appointed Prime Minister of Ukraine.

I mean, surely we're not talking about a literal telegram here? Other favourites include 'wire', 'cable' and the cryptic 'comminiqué'. Are they all just silly journalistic synonyms for 'email', or what?

It's actually not an entirely superficial point when you consider how hard or otherwise it might be to convincingly fake an official message. A physical letter will need a signature and will presumably be printed on headed paper, and while an email doesn't need any of that, it must have some sort of digital signature for the purposes of verification.

luka
09-01-2017, 12:26 PM
steve Bannon, former Navy ... there you have it :fire:

yep lynchpin of the theory.

firefinga
09-01-2017, 12:38 PM
I know this is hardly the main point here, but has anyone else noticed the quaint language invariably used in news reports on hacking, Wikileaks and so on?

I mean, surely we're not talking about a literal telegram here?

Hopefully, we do. Dump twitter, go telegram again!

vimothy
09-01-2017, 12:39 PM
Apparently WhatsApp is popular nowadays: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/04/why-do-diplomats-use-this-alien-whatsapp-emoji-for-vladimir-putin

Mr. Tea
09-01-2017, 01:04 PM
Apparently WhatsApp is popular nowadays: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/04/why-do-diplomats-use-this-alien-whatsapp-emoji-for-vladimir-putin

I reckon Don and Vlad have a private video channel. :x:

sufi
09-01-2017, 01:22 PM
The question is a kind of Rorschach test, which is why it's a great question.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/01/attributing_the_1.html schneier agrees,

firefinga
09-01-2017, 01:34 PM
Question is, is there any hard evicence? The article in the thread-starting post is very vague on what's been really done. Not that I think it's not plausible, on the contrary.

Leo
09-01-2017, 02:13 PM
Question is, is there any hard evicence? The article in the thread-starting post is very vague on what's been really done. Not that I think it's not plausible, on the contrary.

that article in my thread-starting post is from more than a month ago, more detailed intelligence agency reports came out a week ago. still not concrete evidence, but more evidence anyway.

sadmanbarty
12-01-2017, 11:48 PM
C-Span Online Broadcast Interrupted by Russian TV Feed

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/business/media/cspan-russia-today.html

They cheekily leave the most likely explanation till the 2nd to last paragraph, still funny though.

"C-Span’s newsroom monitors many other news channels for breaking news, including domestic networks like CBS and CNN, and various international networks. Its statement suggested that a routing error had caused the RT feed it regularly monitors to be broadcast accidentally."

Leo
13-01-2017, 10:34 PM
Blaming Trump's election on a few smart Russians ignores the contribution of 60 million moronic Americans.

Leo
16-01-2017, 04:00 PM
^^ that's not fair, actually, most of them aren't morons. many may truly believe but many are also misguided, uninformed, misled, preoccupied with the trivial distractions/spin, etc. the ny times has an interview with women explaining why they voted for trump and it's still puzzling (if not infuriating) to hear from their own mouths about the things they feel are important and other factors they completely overlook or dismiss.

Mr. Tea
16-01-2017, 05:34 PM
Yeah, it's easy to take the high ground and dismiss people as idiots, but you have to consider the sheer density and omnipresence of bullshit information - I don't mean fake news as such, just extremely biased or otherwise lousy 'news' sources and professional opinion-havers - and the fact that none of us get to choose the family/community/area we're born into.

Leo
18-01-2017, 01:59 PM
imagine if this were to happen:

1. russians hack DNC email and give them to assange.
2. assange helps trump campaign by releasing DNC emails.
3. trump wins election.
4. assange says he will agree to US extradition if chelsea manning is released
5. obama commutes chelsea manning's sentence.
6. trump sworn in as president.
7. assange extradited to the US.
8. trump administration refuses to press charges against assange.

some or all of this might be fiction, of course. but funny how things (could) work out.

droid
18-01-2017, 02:58 PM
Thats precisely how it did happen (except perhaps for the Manning bit). Assange agreed to meet the Swedish prosecutor a couple of days after the election. He acted as an intermediary for Russian hack info so he could get out of jail via Trump.

droid
19-01-2017, 09:54 PM
So... A senior member of Putin's Kleptocracy and likely source for the Steele Russian dossier found dead under mysterious circumstances.

https://t.co/StMg5dwUMG

bruno
21-01-2017, 09:39 PM
total nonsense. i believe assange and craig murray over the predictable russia-blaming democrats wishing to excuse their catastrophic loss. the 'hacker' was a democrat party insider and the (poorly guarded) emails had zero exposure in the media, not enough to influence the outcome. what did the democrats in was their unlikeable candidate and sycophantic media, plus a very determined and hard working rival.

Leo
21-01-2017, 09:55 PM
no one said the wikileaks emails won the election for trump. i said they helped the trump campaign, which they surely did. and i was speculating (a bit factiously, at that) on the potential quid pro quo between the trump campaign and assange. wasn't rehashing clinton's campaign or making excuses.

droid
21-01-2017, 10:03 PM
Russia had a role. Comey had a role. DNC corruption had a role. Hillary's appalling campaign and history had a role. Trump's populist message had a role.

The emails had huge exposure. With all due respect bruno, have you been living in a cave for the last year?

bruno
21-01-2017, 10:05 PM
right, i do think their impact was minor given the very little exposure they received in u.s. and global media. they did vindicate trump, but given the anti-trump onslaught the impact was likely nil beyond his circle. all i saw was constant anti-trump propaganda which perhaps made people weary enough to eventually cast the vote for him.

droid
21-01-2017, 10:07 PM
right, i do think their impact was minor given the very little exposure they received in u.s. and global media. they did vindicate trump, but given the anti-trump onslaught the impact was likely nil beyond his circle. all i saw was constant anti-trump propaganda which perhaps made people weary enough to eventually cast the vote for him.

They got a yuge amount of exposure in the media. The biggest exposure.

bruno
21-01-2017, 10:11 PM
Russia had a role. Comey had a role. DNC corruption had a role. Hillary's appalling campaign and history had a role. Trump's populist message had a role.

The emails had huge exposure. With all due respect bruno, have you been living in a cave for the last year?
on the contrary, i have been massively engaged in reading and parsing all that i am able to, from local sources to u.s. media and abroad.

while i agree with you that there are many factors to the result, and agree that the russians hack as do most governments with self-interest, i dispute their impact in the result of this election and find the allegations suspect coming as they do from democrat-leaning sources.

bruno
21-01-2017, 10:11 PM
They got a yuge amount of exposure in the media. The biggest exposure.

the best, you might say ;)

Leo
21-01-2017, 10:37 PM
didn't we have this discussion three months ago? i don't have the energy to revisit, tbh.

bruno
21-01-2017, 10:37 PM
i suppose the point is that there is a chance that a lot of this russia stuff is trotted out conveniently to deflect from political responsibility (i have not seen a democrat or podesta mea-culpa) and to delegitimise the whole election. also, if it were about values, petromonarchies would be put to task viz human rights, china would be confronted for its militarisation of the south china sea and so on. but i digress.

bruno
21-01-2017, 10:39 PM
didn't we have this discussion three months ago? i don't have the energy to revisit, tbh.
i wasn't here, sorry.

droid
21-01-2017, 10:52 PM
It hasnt gone anywhere - read the threads!

bruno
21-01-2017, 11:03 PM
i suppose you're right, droid, i don't expect it will go anywhere. i did want to get that and other stuff off my chest. for example, recently, in hong kong, i said something mildly pro-trump and the counter-argument was: how can you defend him when your country has suffered pinochet! which is proof that political discourse has gone off the rails.

droid
21-01-2017, 11:21 PM
No, I think they had a point.

Trump has used the tactics and rhetoric of fascism, explicitly reflecting racist nationalist themes and allying himself with the KKK & neo-nazis in order to gain the support of marginalised communities who have been immiserated by the exact kinds of economic policies and behaviour he extolls.

droid
21-01-2017, 11:22 PM
There's an extended discussion on his fascist credentials in the 'doom' thread.

bruno
21-01-2017, 11:44 PM
No, I think they had a point.

Trump has used the tactics and rhetoric of fascism, explicitly reflecting racist nationalist themes and allying himself with the KKK & neo-nazis in order to gain the support of marginalised communities who have been immiserated by the exact kinds of economic policies and behaviour he extolls.

hardly, he has denounced the kkk (in particular david duke) and i have seen nothing in the trump camp resembling the brownshirt/blackshirt tactics deployed by the left. i fail to see the racist nationalist themes in having a strong border, stopping the inflow of drugs/crime and prioritising rebuilding communities and infrastructure. equating trump with pinochet is completely absurd, there are no parallels between an elected democratic president and the leader of a military junta that disappeared three thousand people.

sadmanbarty
21-01-2017, 11:56 PM
Trump's threatened to imprison political opponents, offered to pay legal fees for violent supporters, seemingly asked supporters to murder anyone trying to 'take away' guns, threatened to restrict press freedoms, proposed restrictions on religious freedom, jail people for flag burning (protected under the 1st amendment) and asked for political opponents to be hacked. Maybe these things were said in jest or for rhetorical effect, but these are not the actions and opinions of a president in a healthy democracy.

bruno
22-01-2017, 12:24 AM
Trump's threatened to imprison political opponents, offered to pay legal fees for violent supporters, seemingly asked supporters to murder anyone trying to 'take away' guns, threatened to restrict press freedoms, proposed restrictions on religious freedom, jail people for flag burning (protected under the 1st amendment) and asked for political opponents to be hacked. Maybe these things were said in jest or for rhetorical effect, but these are not the actions and opinions of a president in a healthy democracy.
yes, i think most of this stuff is taken out of context or too literally.

if by threatening to imprison political opponents you mean hillary, that was a pithy/humorous response in the context of a debate where his opponent quite literally has gotten away with things that others have been jailed for.

while i am sure there have been instances of violence, the violent trump supporter thing has been pushed by a media that overwhelmingly helped fund the clinton campaign, and were compliant in getting out all points of attack against trump however ludicrous in order to paint him as a nazi/racist/etc. which he is clearly not.

having seen the context of the gun thing it was deliberately twisted, in my view he implied nothing of the sort. of course second ammendment advocates will justify right to bear arms as a right to defend against government tyranny and so on, but short of having tanks and drones they have no chance against the military so it is all nonsense.

the press freedoms thing is difficult, he wants to open up libel laws to counteract false accusations/news which the media is no longer required to police. that is hardly curtailing press freedom but it could have a chilling effect on real journalism, which is increasingly rare. in this i think you have a legitimate worry.

i'm not keen on the flag burning thing, i can see why someone would want to have the right to burn a flag and so on but ultimately there is little trump can do to ban this as it is in the hands of the supreme court. the asking for opponents to be hacked thing sounds like exaggeration (would love to see the context).

ultimately yes, i believe a lot of this stuff is taken literally and does not account for his sense of humour, i could be wrong but after seeing a lot of stuff in context i have yet to see anything that presents a danger to democracy. i think a lot of damage is already done, for example in the disprportionate influence of money/lobbyists in washington, if anything the steps trump has promised to curtail this are in the right direction. it remains to see whether he really does or can do this but if he does taht is actually a step in the right direction, hardly undemocratic.

sadmanbarty
22-01-2017, 12:27 AM
if anything the steps trump has promised to curtail this are in the right direction.

Be very careful not to take his rhetoric on this at face value. He is shaping up to be far more corrupt than his predecessors.

droid
22-01-2017, 12:32 AM
Sure, and he doesnt really grab women by the pussy, its just a joke, and a dozen allegations of sexual assault are the punchline.

firefinga
22-01-2017, 12:51 AM
hardly, he has denounced the kkk (in particular david duke) and i have seen nothing in the trump camp resembling the brownshirt/blackshirt tactics deployed by the left. i fail to see the racist nationalist themes in having a strong border, stopping the inflow of drugs/crime and prioritising rebuilding communities and infrastructure. equating trump with pinochet is completely absurd, there are no parallels between an elected democratic president and the leader of a military junta that disappeared three thousand people.

Good Duke got mentioned - here's what he has to tweet:

181

firefinga
22-01-2017, 12:53 AM
Be very careful not to take his rhetoric on this at face value. He is shaping up to be far more corrupt than his predecessors.

Pretty much. That guy MEANS it.

bruno
22-01-2017, 01:00 AM
Good Duke got mentioned - here's what he has to tweet:

181

he's a complete nutcase, trump has rejected him repeatedly. also trump's grandchildren and daughter are jewish, is friends with kanye etc, it's a stretch to imply he is racist.

firefinga
22-01-2017, 01:06 AM
he's a complete nutcase, trump has rejected him repeatedly. also trump's grandchildren and daughter are jewish, is friends with kanye etc, it's a stretch to imply he is racist.

If you're insinuating I am implying Trump is racist, I didn't. I just gave a prime example of what a leading figure of the KKK thinks of a Trump presidency.

bruno
22-01-2017, 01:26 AM
sorry, i saw david duke and closed the window. not surprising he is exploiting the jewish thing, they are after all reponsible for all evils in the world.

bruno
22-01-2017, 03:34 AM
for example, recently, in hong kong, i said something mildly pro-trump and the counter-argument was: how can you defend him when your country has suffered pinochet! which is proof that political discourse has gone off the rails.
in fairness this was on new years eve with some americans i bumped into in search of a drink, when challenged they darted off as is the fashion now among the tolerant left. hongkongers on the other hand i suspect like trump for standing up to china on the south china sea and taiwan issues.

Leo
22-01-2017, 03:47 AM
he's president of the united states, he should say things that are to be taken literally. it's bullshit to give him a pass on things now, it's not the campaign anymore.

droid
22-01-2017, 01:24 PM
he's a complete nutcase, trump has rejected him repeatedly. also trump's grandchildren and daughter are jewish, is friends with kanye etc, it's a stretch to imply he is racist.


Trump has not rejected him repeatedly, in fact, he refused repeatedly reject him before reluctantly disavowing him after enjoying his support for months.

He only became 'friends' with Kanye after Kanye went on an anti-BLM rant shortly before he was hospitalised for mental health problems.

Its true his Son in law is jewish (though by zionist standards this doesn't make his grandchildren jewish), but he also appointed a neo-nazi propagandist to a senior position, so I guess that evens out.

sadmanbarty
22-01-2017, 03:53 PM
Assuming these things were said humorously, that doesn’t mitigate there harmful effects. For one thing some supporters have seemingly taken heed of his statements. Alleged examples are the reports of armed Trump supporters watching polling stations after Trump had told his supporters to do so or of congressman being fearful of reprisals by Trump supporters. Furthermore, acclimatising people to this kind of rhetoric is dangerous. Once a society's used to the idea of a president talking about jailing political opponents or any of the other things I mentioned, it’s a step closer to being a society in which presidents do so. So assuming Trump’s only intending to be a Berlusconi (corrupt and incompetent) rather than dictatorial, he’s still to some extent conditioned American political culture to embrace someone with more malign intent in the future.

bruno
22-01-2017, 10:49 PM
oh come on, let's be reasonable. there was never a threat to jail political oppponents, that is simply untrue. the only fascism i see is violence and threats from the extremist left as seen in the washington protests, on social media and so on. womens rights activists now wear the hijab in protest, a complete abdication of everything feminism stood for. the left shouts down and hits anything it disagrees with. who is the fascist? look in the mirror.

droid
22-01-2017, 11:00 PM
oh come on, let's be reasonable.

Yes, lets.

sadmanbarty
24-08-2017, 03:25 PM
Fun thread

https://twitter.com/conspirator0/status/900158823515770880

sufi
24-08-2017, 03:51 PM
this one even more so, via that one, which i saw earlier via @carolecadwalla

895840586661593088

not just alt-r but also alt-l state sponsored trolls, bruno

droid
24-08-2017, 05:03 PM
Trump has used the tactics and rhetoric of fascism, explicitly reflecting racist nationalist themes and allying himself with the KKK & neo-nazis in order to gain the support of marginalised communities who have been immiserated by the exact kinds of economic policies and behaviour he extolls.

...