A team of investigative reporters at the New York Times unearthed the details of how Russian government agents hacked into the Democratic National Committee computer system, were detected by the FBI, whose warnings were ignored by the guys who answered the phone at the DNC.
It begins:
WASHINGTON — When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its computer network, he was transferred, naturally, to the help desk.
His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C. had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named “the Dukes,” a cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.
The F.B.I. knew it well: The bureau had spent the last few years trying to kick the Dukes out of the unclassified email systems of the White House, the State Department and even the Joint Chiefs of Staff, one of the government’s best-protected networks.
Yared Tamene, the tech-support contractor at the D.N.C. who fielded the call, was no expert in cyberattacks. His first moves were to check Google for “the Dukes” and conduct a cursory search of the D.N.C. computer system logs to look for hints of such a cyberintrusion. By his own account, he did not look too hard even after Special Agent Hawkins called back repeatedly over the next several weeks — in part because he wasn’t certain the caller was a real F.B.I. agent and not an impostor.
“I had no way of differentiating the call I just received from a prank call,” Mr. Tamene wrote in an internal memo, obtained by The New York Times, that detailed his contact with the F.B.I.
It was the cryptic first sign of a cyberespionage and information-warfare campaign devised to disrupt the 2016 presidential election, the first such attempt by a foreign power in American history. What started as an information-gathering operation, intelligence officials believe, ultimately morphed into an effort to harm one candidate, Hillary Clinton, and tip the election to her opponent, Donald J. Trump.
Like another famous American election scandal, it started with a break-in at the D.N.C. The first time, 44 years ago at the committee’s old offices in the Watergate complex, the burglars planted listening devices and jimmied a filing cabinet. This time, the burglary was conducted from afar, directed by the Kremlin, with spear-phishing emails and zeros and ones.
So, why are the Democrats so worried about the Russians but they don’t give a damn that Jill Stein just tried to expose and stop our OWN Jim Crow corrupt elections!?!? No outrage by Democrats at all that we are being stopped from attempting to verify the votes and forensically examine the machines!?! They don’t care that HRC stole the primary from Sanders (no investigations what-so-ever) but now they are all up in arms about this!?! How dare HRC claim we shouldn’t worry about her personal compromising server in her basement, but in the same breath she talks about Russians hacking!?! And of course, HRC and the top level Democrats want Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, and Julian Assange to all be put away for life!?! I mean, Snowden exposed the fact that our own NSA is spying on the entire world and on every American. But no outrage from Democrats there. Its just “move on folks, nothing to see here…” The hypocrisy is not to be believed! We need to challenge our own corrupt government instead of helping them whip up more reasons to go to more war. That is all that this is about. A distraction to keep us from being outraged at THEM! This is a much better article than the NY Times:
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/10/anonymous-leaks-to-the-washpost-about-the-cias-russia-beliefs-are-no-substitute-for-evidence/
Exactly! Thank you Daniella for saying/writing this!
Daniella Liebling
Yes all absolutely true, if I had a magic wand I would wave it and banish them all to a penal colony.
Just one thing what do we do about Trump and how do those groups of citizens who will be eviscerated by Trump and a right wing congress survive the next 4-8 years and a Court that could last 20.
From the teen girl desperate for an abortion who turns to back alley butchers .To American workers union and non union who see the clock turned back to a scene from an Upton Sinclair novel. To the elderly or more likely soon to be elderly forced into a life of poverty .
Tell me your game plan, cause the good kick in the ass I would like to deliver to Hill, Bill and Barrack ain’t going to do SH–
Us poor folks hasn’t got a chance
Unless we organize
Which side are you on?
Please, no more talk of Jill Stein. I didn’t realize that she attended the same dinner with Vladimir Putin as General Mike Flynn, who will now be Trump’s National Security Advisor. She shared Trump’s view that we should work closely with Russia, rather than seeing them as adversaries.
http://americablog.com/2016/09/russian-greens-blast-jill-steins-silence-putins-human-rights-abuses.html
The Russian Green Party blasted Stein for not speaking out against Putin’s human rights abuses.
Two representatives of the Russian Green Party eviscerated American Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein today for her cozy relationship with Russian president Vladimir Putin.
The Russian Greens said Stein was a willing accomplice of Putin’s human rights abuses against the LGBT community, environmentalists, artists, journalists and political dissidents:
“By silencing Putin’s crimes you are silencing our struggle. By shaking his hand and failing to criticize his regime you are becoming his accomplice. By forgetting what international solidarity means you are insulting the Russian environmental movement.”
In particular, Russian environmental activists Yevgeniya Chirikova and Nadezda Kutepova criticized Stein for her recent trip last winter to Moscow to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Russian state propaganda organ. The event included a dinner at which Stein sat at the same dinner table as Putin.
At the same dinner table was seated Donald Trump’s military adviser, retired-Gen. Mike Flynn. Flynn was seated directly next to Putin.
Someone pointed out to me that during the campaign, she constantly criticized Clinton, but never criticized Trump.
This is all too weird for me.
Why was she at dinner with crazy Mike Flynn and Putin in Moscow?
That Dinner was for the Russian Television network.(RT America )The sad part , it is one of the few on air options open for progressive voices.
Stein attacking Clinton from a purely political point is logical she is not getting any votes from Trump supporters.
The real question is why was a top former American intelligence officer with ties to Trump and ultra right views, doing sitting next to Putin .
Lock Flynn and Trump up .
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/04/why-are-us-liberals-turning-putins-news
I really don’t think Bernie would actually appreciate your rant. He admitted he lost the primary and worked to elect the best remaining candidate. You appear to be one who contributed to the Republican painted picture of Hillary which contributed to her loss. Hope you enjoy Trumpland.
Thank you jmay06, my sentiments exactly. I am just so tired trying to reason with these hyper progressives who live in such an ethereal pure universe. I count myself as a progressive but I do feel that Hillary would have been the far better candidate by many magnitudes. Progressives of varying intensities are in a circular firing squad as Trump amalgamates his power and prepares to gut what’s left of our democracy, from A to Z, from education to the nuclear arsenal.
Thanks jmay06, Joe and Joel. I’m worn out with the Clinton haters. If they were on the Titanic, they probably would have kept complaining about the menu as the icy waters rose around them. Perhaps they can find an AA-type support group. The rest of us will work on figuring out how to resist the incoming fascist oligarchs’ kleptocracy.
Putin-gate!!!
For this reason alone, the Electoral College should cast all of its votes for Hillary Clinton. If an enemy of the United States wants Donald Trump President, then Donald Trump should not be president. Letting Trump become president is no different than wanting to be a successful member of the Jonestown Massacre.
Russia hacked the election? Keep listening to the fake news and believing the BS. The only thing that was hacked were Democrat emails which outlined the levels of dishonesty and rigging that took place during the Democratic primaries. Why is everyone up in arms? It’s simple because the truth was exposed and because of that as well as a plethora of other reasons the Democrats lost. However, the stinging truth is that they lost because they chose to run a globalist self serving crook with more baggage than an entire airport instead of the candidate that the people wanted and were calling for and because of that they got exactly what they deserve Donald f’n Trump.
I don’t think that the Electoral College should cast a vote for Clinton, at least not unless new evidence is revealed. We knew a lot of this before the election, because Clinton brought it up in multiple debates.
But, The Real One, you do understand that Russia hacked into the DNC and released information. You do know that Russia doesn’t have our best interests at heart? Russia had a narrative that they wanted to tell. They found information through hacking the DNC, and gave us ONLY the information that fit the Russian narrative. They also timed the release of the information. This is called propoganda. RUSSIAN PROPOGANDA.
To me, this is about identity. Not liberal or democrat identity, or Clinton supporter or Trump supporter identity. It is about AMERICAN identity. The stinging truth to me is that half of America has no problem with a foreign government interfering with our election. This bothers me, because I was under the assumption that Americans understood that foreign governments shouldn’t interfere with OUR election. To me, this is such a BASIC American value – a value that so many of us are willing to throw away.
It brings in mind Benjamin Franklin, when he was famously asked what type of government we have after the constitution had been written.
His answer:
“A Republic. If you can keep it.”
Perhaps we can’t.
The Real One: That is a sad and sorry comment on the election. The email issue was always absurd. Nothing in the emails was criminal; nothing showed that the election was rigged. Hillary beat Sanders, a newcomer to the Democratic party (and still not a member of the party) by 3 million votes. Why are you surprised? She beat Trump by nearly 3 million votes. He and the Republican party engaged in massive voter suppression tactics, not only to suppress the black and Hispanic vote, but to use the hacked emails to accuse her of “criminal” behavior. Remember “lock her up”? That was a fraud.
I have met Hillary Clinton many times. She is a wise, kind, compassionate, intelligent woman with the experience to have been a great president. Instead, we have a far-rightwing narcissist who is handing our government over to billionaires, generals, and extremists who will fight the interests of working people, destroy the environment, deregulate corporate America, and put our foreign policy at the service of ExxonMobil.
The Real One translates into a true, blue deplorable Trump supporter.
And yet, most of the high end money donors and strategists said that Clinton was responsible for her own loss.
Strategists encouraged, cajoled, advised, argued with her to visit the states she lost – and she refused. Her own camp holds this position.
Looking for other things to blame do not seem to work for them.
Wrong, Rudy. Clinton’s camp holds Comey responsible for her loss. Until his last minute intervention, which is directly contrary to the ethics rules of the federal government, she was far ahead of Trump.
Actually Lloyd you may want to think before reaching conclusions and labeling someone a Trump supporter. In fact, the last person I supported and cast a vote for was Ralph Nader. The problem is many here on this blog can’t see through their Democrat blinders and realize that Hillary was a dishonest, self serving corporatist. If you truly study the actions and history of the Clintons as pointed out by a few on this blog you will see a history embroiled in corruption,scandal and greed. In addition, can you please stop with the popular vote nonsense it is not how elections are decided in this Country. Diane if you think a Hillary Clinton Presidency would not have resulted in key positions being handed over to billionaires then you clearly have not been paying attention. Both isles are bought and paid for by the globalist elite and it has been that way since the post JFK days. Wake up you have no choice as both choices lead down the same path. The path of war, debt, and wealth distribution.
Exactly!
The Real One,
I don’t have Democratic blinders. I served in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. I have been registered as a Democrat, a Republican, and an independent.
I supported the Democratic candidate after the primaries were over.
I did so with a sense of urgency because Trump was the Republican candidate.
People like you, with your insane Hillary hatred, helped elect the most rightwing, anti-progressive president in our history.
“Both parties are bought and paid for” is no longer, if it ever was, commentary that deserves a thoughtful response. It ranges somewhere between the age-old man-on-the-street sentiment that “all politicians are crooks” and gibberish.
Thank you, FLERP. Common sense seems to be in diminishing supply.
“If you truly study the actions and history of the Clintons as pointed out by a few on this blog you will see a history embroiled in corruption,scandal and greed.”
I’m not sure what your definition is of actions. Most of the history of the Clintons is based on lies and misinformation spread by the far right hate media machine. Some has merit. Some doesn’t.
For instance, the myth/rumor that Bill Clinton was responsible for the 2007-08 global financial crises because of a Bill the Congress had passed with a veto proof vote that he signed. The actions of Congress was responsible for that, not Bill Clinton signature on a bill that a presidential veto wouldn’t have stopped.
Scandals are often manufactured by the opposition. Some are true, yes, but when they are true the evidence often ends in a conviction or an out-of-court settlement before a verdict can be reached. For instance, the $25 million that Trump agreed to pay out to settle the case against his bogus and fraulent Trump University, because a loss in that court case might have hurt his chances to reach the White House even after he won the Electoral College. It wouldn’t look good to be found guilty of fraud before taking the oath of office for President of the United States.
Trump has bragged, boasted, lied, that he never lost a court case.
Trump was the plaintiff in 1,900 court cases, the defendant in 1,450, and involved in bankruptcy in 150. Trump settled 175 and lost 38.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/
You seriously need to read outside of your consipraicy theory bubbles. If you want to know who Hillary Clinton really is, look closely at what she voted for and against when she was a U.S. Senator for New York State. Those votes would reveal if she was embroiled in corruption, scandal, and greed, something that has been well documented about Donald Trump for most if not all of his adult life.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton#.WFF2_fkrKUk
If we “truly study” the history of the Clintons then we stay away from the far right hate media and the conspiracy theory sites that Trump seems to love, and we use fact check sites to discover how much of that history is true.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/clintons.asp
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/tracking-the-clinton-controversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/
I have a firm belief that anyone who reaches the White House has to be dirty, because you don’t get that far without playing the political game. Donald Trump appears to be outside of the dirty game of politics but his mud pen has been in the private sector with a long history of bias, a history of racism, endless lies, links with crime famlies, cons, fraud, corporate bankruptcies where he still profited and the investors lost, molesting women, not paying workers what he owes them, cheating partners, etc.
Now he can get his muddy feet dirty in the political arena by becoming the U.S. President. Before he’s done, he might even break the Clintons’ record for scandals both true and bogus.
If you want to expose the dirt that clings to the Clintons, then I demand we also shine a light on the slime that’s super glued to to Donald Trump. Trump has a well documented history that supports every adjective I threw at him. On top of that, his behavior clearly shows he is a super narcissist and psychopath who has never done anything for anyone at anytime unless it prof tied him and his children.
At least with the Clintons regardless of the scandals and alleged corruption that has never been proven by a Congressional investigation or in court, we have a history of her fighting for women and children. Even her voting record as a Senator in New York supports that fact.
“For decades, Clinton has prioritized bills and policies promoting reproductive rights, equal pay, and family leave … ” There’s a lot more in the Atlantic piece about the issues Hillary Clinton championed that helped people: men, women and children. Her voting record in the Senate also supports the good she did or attempted to do.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/more-than-just-a-symbol/476490/
If we compare the two, Donald vs. Hillary, and we have a minus and plus column, all we will see for Donald will be minuses and an empty plus column. Hillary will have check marks in both columns.
I refuse to let you control the debate so we only focus judgement on the Clintons while ignoring Donald Trump’s history of corruption. Dig deep enough, and you will find dirt in the history of almost every if not all career politicians. With Trump, all we have to do is stick a needle in him, anywhere, and the puss will gush forth in a torrent of fermenting corruption and slime.
As long as the objectivity is not in question when both sides are studied!
My issues with Clinton are identified, provable, and not related to any right wing conspiracy or whatever.
My issues with trump are identified, provable, and not related to any left wing conspiracy.
A “lesser of the two evils” vote does not fit with me, so I could not vote for either one.
I do not need to read hacked emails where Clinton is the topic, I look at what i see her do. I don’t need hacked emails from trump, because the man has no filter on either his mouth or his tweeting.
Although I voted “against my Party,” at some personal cost, we now have a president. And whether or not i like the person, I have to respect the office. I will disagree with trump on a lot of issues – but he still is the president after January 20. I have the right to make my disagreements known, publicly, and I will use that right whenever necessary.
But he still is the president, and I still have to respect the office
He is not my president. He is Putin’s president
The Oval office is a room. How do you respect a room that is the office, a space inside of a building, for the President of the Untied States. Respect the room if you have to, but don’t respect the president who works in that room unless he/she earns that respect.
I refuse to blindly give respect to someone just because they wear the label of President of the Untied States and work out of the Oval Office in the White House.
What the “hell” is there to respect?
Here’s what I respect: the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments because they were written to protect the people from tyrants who might one day sit in the Oval Office in the White House in Washington DC.
I might not agree with all of those amendments but because the Founding Fathers created a flexible Constitution that could change with the times, amendments I don’t approve of might go away one day.
It’s not respect that a corrupt powerful oligrach like Donald Trump has earned. If anything, people will fear him or despise him for who he really is that are often revealed through his Twitter rants and when he bullies common propel through his Tweets.
A President I will respect is one who is defined by the U.S. Constitution, and Donald Trump does not fit that mold. He has already spit on the Constitution repeatedly with most of his appointments. For me, Donald Trump must earn my respect. He doesn’t get it automatically just because the Electoral College hands him a title to put in front of his name.
A president that lives up to the oath of office is one who will earn my respect.
US Constitution, Article II, Section 1
Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
And before Trump even takes that oath, he has already trampled and disrespected it. What happen if Trump changes the language of the oath when he takes it?
“wealth redistribution” sorry for the typo
Where are my response posts that I submitted over 6 hours ago?
Real One,
First rule of this blog: Don’t insult your host. You did so repeatedly. When you are civil, you can return. When you visit your friends’ homes, do you behave that way?
As for your Hillary mania, move on. She will not be president, don’t kick a woman when she’s down. Trump will be the President of the United States. Deal with it.
I am not posting any more attacks on Hillary. That’s yesterday. Post your attacks on her at Breitbart.
The Real One seems to get it.
Again, the Clintonistas need to get over their loss. All the wailing and whining serves no purpose. And the pseudo news of the “hack job” should at best be taken with a 25# grain of salt:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/12/12/historical-structural-reasons-for-skepticism-of-cia-claims-remaining-agnostic-on-claims-of-russian-hackers/
Autopsies can serve a useful purpose. We’re not supposed to discuss that the Russians hacked into our election and tried to influence its outcome?
I don’t hear Clinton supporters whining. I hear Sanders supporters spewing venom on Clinton. I would have supported either. This is the firing squad arranged in a circle. Let’s focus on the next four years, not constantly complaining that she should have not beaten Bernie, even though she got three million primary votes more than he did. Bernie entered the Democratic primary even though he is not a Democrat. He is still not a Democrat. Is it surprising that party loyalists preferred a Democrat?
What does anyone know about Americans for Prosperity? I was introduced to “The Fieldworker” yesterday, and he informed us that he would be working for conservative values, like lower taxes, limiting union negotiables and school choice. Enlightened as I am by the conversation(s) on this blog (and I mean that – I have learned a lot!) I asked him what exactly he meant by “school choice.”
“Well, if your kids want to go to another public school in the area, or if you want your kids to go to private schools, than the money should follow the student…” Asked what kind of an impact this would have on public education, he answered something about “competition…”
Being less than impressed with that answer, I asked him if he had done the research on how well/no well this was going in laces where this is actually happening. He had not. But he could not “imagine what could possibly go wrong in those conditions…”
A former member of the local school board and I painted a picture together, and in that, I used some of the arguments found on this very blog. The young man promised to do some more research.
His answer to the “lowering taxes” did not fare much better, nor did his responses on the “limiting union negotiables.”
His main intention is to keep legislators on task, fulfilling the promises made. Of course, I fully agree with that, But when I asked him if that would be the same for Republican legislators, he mumbled something.
Rudy,
Americans for Prosperity is funded by the Koch brothers. You can read about them in Jane Mayer’s book, “Dark Money.”
Anyone who doesn’t know about Americans for Prosperity hasn’t been paying attention to politics for quite some time.
Nah, go ahead and discuss it. That is if the “it” is a legitimate concern, and from my take, I don’t consider it legit. Even if there is a grain of truth to it all I can say is “what goes around comes around” and “that’s just the way it is”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOeKidp-iWo
Thank you, Rudy. You sent that young man off with some things to think about. That is important.
Trump’s election serves no good purpose, if not to dissect how it happened, prevent it from happening again and brace for excessive stupidity.
The really sad thing is that things must be truly awful in many parts of this great country for this to have happened, and that has to be addressed, properly.
It seems the “spook” manual has changed. The “old” one advises certain steps
to be taken, if you think you have a “fly on the wall”.
Feed the “fly” strategic mis-information. Track the “chatter” of said mis-fo, to
locate the “ears”. Infect (virus) the ears. DO NOT SHOUT, hey, we see your
cards (keep them closer to your chest).
On one hand, our “spooks” claim the selectoral collage steering was a rusky move.
So bothered they were, Comey joined the effort…Priceless
Let me see if I have this straight: Ms. Clinton spent over $700,000,000 on her campaign and had no one on her tech staff who could figure out if multiple phone calls from the FBI were real? Had no one on her tech staff who could do a thorough analysis of the web site to see if someone was hacking it? And after receiving phone calls from the FBI did nothing after September 2015 to redouble efforts to make certain the DNC site was shielded from hackers? AM I missing something or is this a case of incompetence on the part of the campaign and NOT a problem caused by the FBI?
Good point.
All this focus on the provenance of the emails is intentional to distract from the content, which even the authors do not dispute is genuine. Whoever let us know what was going on with our own election should be thanked.
The fact that a foreign country interfered in our selection of our president is shocking and unprecedented. It was not a 400-pound guy sitting on his bed in New Jersey, as Trump claimed in a debate. It was the Russian government.
The Russian hackers and/or whomever only revealed the Democratic emails not the GOP emails.
By releasing the emails of only ONE campaign, the Russian government/Wikileaks skewed the information voters received.
Elections are comparisons between two candidates. It’s not “Clinton or any other person” It’s “Clinton or Trump”.
People had Clinton campaign emails but they didn’t have Trump campaign emails. That’s an editorial decision, not “transparency”. They filtered information and then released the portion that helped their candidate.
Take the same situation, “campaign emails are stolen and then released” and imagine if BOTH campaign’s emails had been released or just Trumps. Much different story voters would have heard, right?
Wikileaks and the Russian government aren’t heroes of transparency. They didn’t give you “the information” you needed to make a decision between two options. They gave you HALF the information- the emails they wanted you to read.
You heard trump’s mouth. He did not need leaked emails to question his ability to be president. He showed with every speech and tweet there were questions about that…
But you had stolen information from Clinton and you did not have it from Trump. In a binary choice that’s a skew toward the candidate from whom you have LESS information. Trump knew this. He bragged about it.
Here’s a clear example of how this plays out in a choice between two:
“It was like I was standing out there naked,” said Annette Taddeo, a Democrat who lost her primary race after secret campaign documents were made public. “I just can’t describe it any other way. Our entire internal strategy plan was made public, and suddenly all this material was out there and could be used against me.”
It didn’t actually break through all the noise to the surface, but the damage was done because of a cooperative news media and local bloggers, who teamed up with Russia to do harm to Democratic candidates. There were no similar efforts against Republican candidates for the House.”
There were no efforts against Republican candidates.
You had +1 on Clinton and 0 on Trump and it’s pick ONE of two.
You actually didn’t have Sanders either, so if the comparison was “Clinton campaign versus Sanders campaign” it’s not a valid comparison because you have much more information on Clinton (good or bad- doesn’t matter).
If I’m comparing a person who is naked to a person who is clothed I know more about how the person who is naked looks. Most people would say they benefit from clothing in that comparison 🙂
Actually, the information was NOT from Clinton, but from the DNC and from her campaign. Where trump is open about his feelings about others, the emails from the DNC and Clinton campaign have made it clear that there was some seriously questionable things going on.
When trump opens his mouth, the public knows about it. Clinton, on the other hand, refuses to share her speech texts with the public, no matter how much the claim was made about wanting to be transparent.
The Clinton campaign was warned – several times. When someone tells me my network is compromised, I take that more serious than a heart attack! Were I to receive a call from the FBI, I would call the FBI back immediately, rather than sitting around for a while thinking it was a prank.
Yes, the network was messed with. Bad! The people were warned, repeatedly. Good! The multiple warnings were ignored. Dumb.
Rudy,
Her speeches were hacked and leaked.
That was always the problem with Wikileaks as a “transparency” org. They’re not transparent. When they say they’re releasing everything they’ve stolen you’re relying on the assertions of a group of faceless nameless people who are accountable to no one.
No one has any idea if they have an agenda, if they’re captured, and there’s no way to check. They’re worse on transparency and accountability than any of the government actors they’re supposedly monitoring. They’re asking you to take them completely on faith- you would never accept that as “transparency” from any other entity.
Do they have Trump campaign emails and chose to release only Clinton emails? Does the Russian government have Trump emails but released only Clinton emails to Wikileaks? No one knows and no one will ever know.
It’s the opposite of “transparency”. They’re completely opaque. They’ve set themselves up as these romanticized truth-tellers but it’s nonsense. “Truth” isn’t stealing some portion of available information and releasing that- that’s half or a quarter or a tenth of the “truth”.
In this instance the public was missing exactly half the information in a binary choice situation- they had all the info on Clinton and none on her opponent. The Wikileaks model of “transparency” fails in that situation and it failed here.
The State Department, the office of the President, the FBI, the legislatures of the states and federal government, the NYPD, and all other government officials should be required to publish carbon copies of every email and transcripts of every phone call and meeting on Wikileaks in real-time. There can be no problem with that, because the oligarchs control government, and because transparency is always good.
No one points out that we seem to have the Russians and the FBI acting the same way. I cannot recall this in our history. Regardless of whether this affected the outcome of the election, this bears investigation. But who will investigate? Whom do we trust?
RT is Putin propaganda machine for his oligarch regime. When I was invited for an interview, I declined. Not helping Russian billionaires.
RT is actually my nickname.
(The new, updated Smith-Mundt Act 2012 reversed a ban on “domestic propaganda” (2012))
Given WikiLeaks impeccable reputation and their repeated claim that the DNC emails were leaked
(not hacked) by the DNC, and recent support of the same claim by a British Ambassador who knows
the person inside the DNC who leaked the emails suggests the story is simply Times propaganda.
The corporatist NYTIMes and WashPost print what they are told what to print now by their corporate owners. Don’t expect much objectivity in their political coverage today.
I agree with this earlier poster here.> Duane Swacker – December 14, 2016 at 6:19 am
Again, the Clintonistas need to get over their loss. All the wailing and whining serves no purpose. And the pseudo news of the “hack job” should at best be taken with a 25# grain of salt:
Historical & Structural Reasons for Skepticism of CIA Claims: Remaining Agnostic on Claims of Russian Hackers – http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/12/12/historical-structural-reasons-for-skepticism-of-cia-claims-remaining-agnostic-on-claims-of-russian-hackers/
Did anyone else read the counterpunch article above (that he posted in the comments here) because it is excellent analysis. Quote: Truth is, we know nothing about the veracity of this leaked information from the CIA. As to the truth of these reports, I remain agnostic in these matters and highly recommend others do too. While we know nothing about the truth of these reports, we know a lot about the messenger delivering this news, and what we know should give us pause before accepting news of a Russian electoral coup here at home.
As a scholar with two decades of academic research studying the CIA, I think many on the American left are letting their dire fear of the damage Trump will surely bring to not fully consider how the CIA is playing these events. Many on the American left misunderstand what the CIA is and isn’t. It isn’t some sort of right wing agency, it is an agency filled with bright people with beliefs across the mainstream political spectrum—many of the CIA’s anti-democratic coups have occurred under Democratic presidents, carried out by liberal CIA operatives; but most significantly the CIA is part of the deep state.
More considered opinions and analysis of the so-called Russian election coup can be found if you search for Russian Hackers on the counterpunch.org website. Like this one: The Fake Campaign to Blame ‘the Russians’ – by DAVE LINDORFF -DECEMBER 12, 2016 – http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/12/12/the-fake-campaign-to-blame-the-russians/
Study up folks. Diane is aa historian and knows that history must be analysed and debated not just promoted and propagandized bypartisan suporters of a party line.
I know that the Russians have many reasons to use hackers and propaganda to disrupt our elections and elect a stupid puppet to discredit our government
Putin is a vicious KGB who kills dissidents and journalists and hates gays
“The corporatist NYTIMes and WashPost print what they are told what to print now by their corporate owners.”
Zzzzzzzz.
Also false. When are the meetings when the corporate leaders tell reporters and editors how to slant the news. Why do no retired journalists confirm these absurd fantasies? Are they brainwashed?
There are a lot of people who would benefit from a tour of a newsroom at a daily paper, and even more from shadowing a reporter for a couple weeks. People have no idea what they do.
I know what goes on in a newsroom. The endless pressure of deadlines, Deadlines, Deadlines, and for most reporters, stories are assigned by an editor, no choice. If there is a choice, it will be one from a list again from the editors or editor.
The Deadlines for most newspapers make it almost impossible to do the research necessary to write a balanced piece. If you have to get your story in before the paper is put to bed, then you take short cuts or risk losing your job. That’s why all these foundations set up by the billionaire oligarchs get away with their assembly line shit being published as legitimate news or features.
Then there is the fact that conservatives are so brainwashed to distrust the traditional media, many conservative sources refuse to be interviewed for a story unless it is a puff piece, and this is a major factor behind accusations of bias because it is so difficult to write a balanced piece when all a corporation has is a sheet they hand the reporter full of BS and PR with no comment for anything that might legitimately make the corporation look bad.
On top of that, a reporter can be assigned a 30 column inch story and editors might cut it to 15 inches because of changes at the last minute. In a rush, the editor will just slash off the last 15 inches because the story should be written in an inverted pyramid style so it would still work. Most papers are laid out before deadline with every story having a column inch length to make the job easier.
Most reporters start out struggling to be as balanced as possible but there are far too many factors involved from assignment to final deadline to allow that to always happen.
Then there’s breaking news that throws the schedule off balance. Stories are killed. Shorter time between assignment and final deadline. Editors are also rushed. Powerful and/or famous people already have their trilobites in a file. When one of them dies, it’s pulled from the file, updated, and published.
One could start with Carl Bernstein, late ’70’s, Rolling Stone.
Lucinda,
Why do you find credible the musings of an opinionated writer but not credible the conclusions of the nation’s intelligence analysts?
You are demonstrating what Orwell wrote about: how belief in facts and institutions are eroded in a totalitarian society.
Reading some of these comments is scary. False news, truth not relative et al. People will believe what they choose to believe.
Only two newspapers said to vote for Trump. ULTRA conservative Krauthammer and other VERY conservative writers likewise said do not vote for Trump.
With what we know now, factual, Trump should NEVER have received the electoral college votes which he has done.
The future of the planet as well as any semblance of a democracy are at grave risk now with Trump at the helm.
This will not be believed until it is too late I greatly fear. Democracies have a habit of not surviving for long periods of time.
Gordon, you write what I have been fearful of saying. I am coming to the realization that this may be a time of fundamental change that will be nothing like most of us had envisioned. I’m fear that my children will live in a world that is nothing like we could have envisioned just a few years ago. I have never been as pessimistic about the future in my life as I am now. I’m almost to the point of yearning to go back to the time when the Iron Curtain existed. At least then we understood what the stakes were. We, as a polity, no longer do.
If there was legitimate certainty, based on facts (rather than the circumstantial evidence the Times and others are passing off as facts) that Russia hacked our elections, then why hasn’t our ambassador to Russia been recalled, the traditional diplomatic response to things of this sort?
Where are the charges of treason against Trump, the beneficiary of it all, who urged those hacking the DNC and Podesta to continue doing so? Where are the charges of treason against his advisors with financial connections to Russia?
Perhaps Pooty-Poo (George W. Bush’s nickname for Putin, on whom he had a bit of a man-crush) did hack the elections and release all that info, but the actual response of the US government and national security apparatus rather than a gullible media, suggests they don’t take it that seriously.
I don’t know what “legitimate” certainty is, but it may be difficult and perhaps impossible to ever know with absolute “certainty” who was ultimately behind the hacks. My limited understanding is that investigating this kind of “hacking” requires the investigator to make a series of inferences about the “fingerprints” left by the hack, the toolsets used by the hackers, and similarities with prior hacks. Based on those inferences, you can get a high degree of confidence that a certain group was responsible. And tying a certain group’s activities to a state sponsor requires another set of inferences. Here, my understanding is that there is compelling evidence that the “Dukes” group was behind the hack (the FBI told the DNC back in September 2015 that it believed the Dukes group had compromised one of the DNC’s servers). And there appears to be a long trail of intelligence that concludes that the Dukes are employed by Russia, based on the type and timing of the group’s prior hacks. I don’t think any of this is known, much less knowable, with “certainty.” But that doesn’t mean there isn’t very good reason to believe it’s true. And it certainly doesn’t mean there isn’t very good reason to take this seriously and fully investigate it. We indict and convict people of capital crimes without requiring “certainty” of their guilt.
If your point is that we should take these allegations with a grain of salt and suspend our ultimate judgment until more facts are known (or more known facts are public), then sure, I agree. But if your point is that the allegations are manifestly incredible and should not be taken seriously, then I disagree.
Obama has spoken to Putin directly. He has chosen not to make a public circus; he never has been one to publicly embarrass other countries, especially as an early move, unless he is pretty sure the result will be the “retreat” of the other country in the face of ostracism. Putin is not going to pull his forelock and bow. If pulling our ambassador would give us some sort of leverage, then he would do it. I can’t see how it would help at this point, but I hope they have more in their diplomatic pouch than symbolically going home.
AND Here the sadness starts…
“Yasmin Seweid, a Muslim teenager who made international headlines after she claimed to be the victim of a hate-filled attack on the New York City subway earlier this month, was arrested on Wednesday after admitting to fabricating her story.
She was arraigned at Manhattan Criminal Court early Thursday morning and appeared to be in shock, her head shaved and uncovered. The 18-year-old from New Hyde Park on Long Island was charged with falsifying a police report and obstructing governmental administration. The misdemeanors each carry up to a year in jail.”
Newsweek carried this article in the online section. Not only seems this young lady to have made a mess of her own immediate future, but has also blocked understanding for cases where the story is true…