The same media/democrats that celebrated hacks/leaks that served their purpose (and claimed first amendment and free speech for hacks/leaks), were suddenly apoplectic over this leak. Why? They had no problems with any of the far bigger and more serious security breaches below (that cost lives of our spies or ruined people). Those had made those with (r)’s after their names look bad (some legitimately, some not), but this time it showed the truth about people with (d)’s after their name. If the Russians exposed the truth about Hillary and did the medias job for them, THAT was the unforgivable sin. Here’s a few samples of the media celebrating leaks/hacks:
** "Pentagon Papers”, Iraq War Logs (at Wikileaks), Valerie Plame affair, Climategate , Snowden/Prism
** No one at the Times called Dan Rather’s Memogate (fake leaks about George Bush’s avoiding service) a threat to democracy, and those turned out to be false
** Someone hacked/leaked Trump’s Tax Returns, and the NYT said they’d go to prison to publish the truth about a Republican (while trying to swing an election)
** Watergate was celebrating swinging elections and toppling administration — that was Pulitzer worthy stuff, even with clandestine deep-throat type leaks
The discredited partisan sources (media and Hillary/Obama supporters) were embarrassed by the outcome of the election (and their bad reporting/predictions), were trying to find a scapagoat for how they could be so wrong. So they’e willing to go along with any of the administration/DNC scams about how they should have been right, but they were cheated (and thus a wild-eye’d conspiracy, with no evidence of the Russians, was easier for them to accept than their own incompetence), and tales of sophisticated international espionage gained traction.
Look at the context:
- first the DNC/Hillary/Supporters broke their promise and demanded recounts (which went even more in Trump’s favor)
- then they went with a distraction about the popular vote versus electoral votes (which doesn’t matter)
- then they did riots and violence, many acts of bullying, fake claims of racism/bigotry by Trump supporters
- they tried to intimidate Electoral College folks to break their oaths and switch votes (and sold fake stories about how that was going to happen), or tried to stall the electoral vote
- and then they tried to invent the story that the Russians had recruited elite hackers to hack the election (or tried to carry water for the DNC position) and that’s why the electoral college should vote for someone other than Trump.
- Only it didn’t work, and more Hillary electors refused to vote for her than Trump ones
- And these weren’t elite hackers, they were trollish kids, using very non sophisticate techniques (not looking like State actors)
- The media and democrats that were telling us to never trust the CIA, were suddenly saying we should trust unnamed agency sources without evidence (and without question).
- These are the same folks that didn’t see 9/11 coming
- that screamed “Bush Lied” for listening to the head of CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world when they said, “WMD’s were a slam dunk” in Iraq
- or the same CIA director who was wrong on ISIS/Caliphate and said it was, "unfathomable to think ISIS could establish a caliphate in the Middle East”,
- and Obama confirmed later that, "ISIS was not on my intelligence radar screens” when he was pulling us out of Iraq and drawing red lines that he wouldn’t enforce in Syria (and funding/arming those groups that became ISIS)
- the same CIA director that helped in draft the ill-fated Benghazi talking points (that the attack was a “spontaneous — not a premeditated” protest)
- And ignored evidence that it wasn’t the Russians, like a UK intelligence asset that said he carried the leaks from a disgruntled Bernie supporter to Assange
- The same media/democrats that celebrated hacks/leaks that served their purpose (and claimed first amendment and free speech for hacks/leaks), were suddenly apoplectic over this leak. Why? They had no problems with any of the far bigger and more serious security breaches below (that cost lives of our spies or ruined people). Those had made those with (r)’s after their names look bad (some legitimately, some not), but this time it showed the truth about people with (d)’s after their name. If the Russians exposed the truth about Hillary and did the medias job for them, THAT was the unforgivable sin. Here’s a few samples of the media celebrating leaks/hacks:
- "Pentagon Papers”, Iraq War Logs (at Wikileaks), Valerie Plame affair, Climategate , Snowden/Prism
- No one at the Times called Dan Rather’s Memogate (fake leaks about George Bush’s avoiding service) a threat to democracy, and those turned out to be false
- Someone hacked/leaked Trump’s Tax Returns, and the NYT said they’d go to prison to publish the truth about a Republican (while trying to swing an election)
- Watergate was celebrating swinging elections and toppling administration — that was Pulitzer worthy stuff, even with clandestine deep-throat type leaks
- The fact that the hacks showed the Clinton campaign actually doing what they were accusing the Russians of doing (manipulating our election) is something they’ve totally failed to explore. This is real election tampering, but they had no problem with the democrats doing it by spreading lies and falsehoods, it’s only a problem if the Russians do it to expose the truth:
- Remember the Hillary campaign WAS manipulating our election (in the primary and general election) — that’s what it showed
- Including hiring goons/brown-shirts to go to opposition rally’s and commit assaults/violence and false flag efforts to do bad things and pin it on the other side
- there was an ongoing effort to lobby, coerce, and even threaten electors to get them to change their votes in the Electoral College votes
- After 8 years of doing nothing about serious hacks or real threats to national security, they haven’t even bothered to define what is an official cyber attack, suddenly Obama does his most aggressive foreign policy move (throwing out 35 Russian diplomats), over a minor issue like this, and the media isn’t calling him on it? Remember the other hacks and events that got no response from Obama, to realize what an overreaction throwing Russian diplomats is:
- April 2009 – Hacked the U.S. electrical grid
- April 2009 – Hacked Pentagon’s Joint Strike Fighter project
- March 2012 – NASA was hacked (as they were in 2011) – had control of NASA computers
- February 2013 – DOE (Dept of Energy) was hacked – 14,000 employee records stolen
- December 2013 – China Hacked Federal Election Commission
- March 2014: Russian invaded and annexed Crimea
- March 2014: Russian destabilized and invaded other parts of Ukraine (Russia violated multiple treaties, Obama breaks our promise to defend Ukraine)
- September 2014 – Hacked U.S. Postal Service – 800,000 employee records
- September 2014 – China Hacked National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- September 2014: Draws Red line in Syria over WMD’s (chemical weapons), then walks away when it’s violated
- October 2014 – White House Website was hacked
- November 2014: State Department was hacked
- April 2015: Dept. of Defense was hacked
- May 2015: IRS was hacked – getting 300,000 tax returns
- June 2015: Office of Personnel Management
- Hillary using a private email security in violation of the law (and that was likely hacked according to the FBI), wasn’t a problem for the media (despite secret, top secret and super-duper top-secret stuff being on there): nothing on it mattered. But her underlings, Podesta gets hacked and it releases truths about the Democrat campaign (and how they were corrupting an election) and not anything vaguely related to national security, and this is what the mainstream media cares about as a big threat? Are they that stupid, or that partisan? Do they get the irony/hypocrisy in the position?
- Here’s the summary of the evidence it was the Russians (as told us by a private firm, since no one in the U.S. government analyzed the hack themselves):
- Some of the malware, resembled techniques the Russians (and everyone else) used, and they touched a Russian service (that lots of hackers use), and one used an alias of a famous Russian secret police force founder: https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/
- But the FBI never investigated themselves: https://www.buzzfeed.com/alimwatkins/the-fbi-never-asked-for-access-to-hacked-computer-servers
- A PHP/Wordpress Security Company (the root of the hack) points out how absurd it is to think it was the Russians. https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/
- Imagine how likely it is for a GRU or FSB officer, that would use “Iron” Felix Dzerzhinsky name (the man who founded the Soviet secret police) as their handle in their hacks
- Or how likely it is for a state actor to use a publicly available malware kit, many versions out of date? (P.A.S. version 3.1.0, instead of the latest 4.1.1b) — usually state actors develop their own tools. And the IP traces, etc., show nothing unusual or specific to Russia.
- Some Russians said they felt good about the results (as if that’s conclusive that they were responsible for the leaks, and that the leaks had any significant impact on the election):
- Even the far left sources (and others) are questioning the lack of evidence to support the administrations claims:
- And if it was a hack, the proper responses are not to attack the Russians by throwing out diplomats, but by fixing our security
- And if was a Russian hack, and it was worthy of a response this aggressive — it shows how utterly clueless Obama was in 2012, for criticizing Romney for having concerns about Russia — before they annexed Crimea, Ukraine, and committed these hacks. And Obama openly mocked Romney for trying to restart the cold war.
So what we know is that there’s zero evidence of hacking at the polls, the worst case scenario is that the Russians got the truth about Hillary out, and that influencing an election by telling the truth isn’t a criminal act and doesn’t delegitimize an election. And this is nothing new or unusual, as we’d done it, with lies — so this was better than our actions.
More References and Timeline:
- Ian Bremmer comments on how ineffective Obama has been in all this: https://charlierose.com/videos/29658
- Truth about the agenda behind the leaks: http://nypost.com/2017/01/08/democrats-wage-anti-trump-offensive-for-their-own-gain/
- Which the Russians openly mock: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_RUSSIA_US?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-01-08-05-34-19
- The media only seems to care about security/sanctity of elections when it’s discrediting someone with an (r) after their name. When it shows how their side is corrupting them (e.g Soros, the DNC, or Hillary campaign, subverting ours and other elections) then there’s a virtual black-out on coverage. Selective outrage and hypocrisy in the media is a bigger threat to our democracy than hackers leaking the truth (in my book): http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-bizarre-media-blackout-of-hacked-george-soros-documents/
- This touches on something JOURNALISTS would look into (the moral consistency of the Obama administrations wrt Russia), is there any there, there. Are they being consistent, or is this a lot of hypocritical hand-waving distractions that contradict their policies/behavior before he was a lame-duck: http://www.hoover.org/research/obamas-legacy-deceit
Facts/Myths about the hacking:
The summary and timeline of the Russian Hacker invention seems to be the following:
2009.03.06 – One of the first big international moves by the Obama administration (via Hillary Clinton) was to give Russia a “reset button” because relations had chilled since it had invaded Georgia, and because it was the Obama/Hillary administration, they of course got the translation wrong on the button, which read “Overcharged” instead of “Reset”. This sent a clear signal to the Russians that they weren’t dealing with a competent administration and that future invasions would be met with gifts and platitudes.
2011 – Putin blames Clinton for fomenting mass protests in Russia after disputed 2011 parliamentary elections that challenged his rule
2015 Summer – a phishing campaign (the least sophisticate hack known to mankind) sends a fake email to over 1,000 government agents gets the smartest man in the DNC (Leon Podesta) to give up his password, in a social hack worthy of a 14 year old or Nigerian Prince.
2016.06.14 – WaPo publishes an article that has a cyber security firm explain that two agencies (who may be tied to the Russians), had attacked the DNC for over a year. But since the only thing they’re sure they took was Opposition Research on Donald Trump — so the DNC and WaPo (but I repeat myself), wasn’t that concerned. Later the CIA claimed they’d hacked both DNC and RNC but only exposed the DNC info — but there’s no evidence they succeeded on the RNC.
2016 Sept (published 2016.11.03) – Julian Assange and his allies explained that these were leaks not hacks (someone inside the DNC gave them the emails) so the source of the leaks were NOT the Russians. Craig Murray (A U.K. intelligence operative and associate of Assange) said he flew to Washington for a clandestine handoff of the emails and he gave the leaks to Assange, and his source was an angry Bernie supporter in the DNC, not the Russians.
2016.12.11 – Assange/allies go further and explain that the Obama administration has brutally persecuted whistleblowers and hackers through extradition, but in this case, while the CIA claims to know who tried to subvert an election, but it’s not worth the effort to try to extradite them for prosecution in the U.S. to set an example?
2016.12.15 Julian Assange went on to Sean Hannity to emphatically repeat it was not the Russians, and Hillary and the Obama administration is making this crap up. And jokes this wasn’t much of “hack” anyways
2016.12.16 – NSA Whistleblower agrees with Assange that it was an inside leak (and not the Russians) – http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-16/nsa-whistleblower-destroys-obamas-russia-narrative-hard-evidence-points-inside-leak-
2016.12.16 – The Hillary/Obama campaign starts speaking about how the
2016.11.03 Foreign Ministry spokeswoman (Maria Zakharova) of Russia says, "the “public bickering with Russia” before the US election is probably a “smokescreen” to draw the voters’ attention away from serious domestic issues”
2016.11.25 Obama Admin Officially Told the NY that the elections "Were Free and Fair" — and went on "The Federal government did not observe any increased level of malicious cyber activity aimed at disrupting our electoral process on election day. As we have noted before, we remained confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure, a confidence that was borne out on election day. As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective."
2016.12.29 – The Obama administration gets the NCCIC (DHS & FBI) to release a political document on "Grizzley Steppe” — codename for some investigation which admits the hack was caused by a 2015 phishing campaign with no hard evidence of ties to the “Russians” and contains no useful content or details (or anything vaguely looking like evidence of the Russians as the source of the hack, let alone of the wikileads info), and instead talks mostly about basic security procedures to avoid other basic hacks that weren’t the cause of this leak. Many in the security community and journalists scoff at this having any material value, while polemics are all convinced that this proves it was the dirty Russians.
2016.12.29 – The Obama administration retaliates against the Russians by throwing out 35 diplomats (after ignoring dozens of far worse events in the past). Screw with national security or sovereignty, use chemical weapons, invade neighbors, nothing. But tell the truth about Democrats (using their own emails), and that’s worthy of international escalation.
2017.01.04 – WaPo invents that the Russians were also responsible for a PowerGrid attack — and the story is soon debunked
2017.01.05 – Ali Watkins of Buzzfeed exposes that neither the FBI nor DHS (nor any other government agency) had bothered to investigate the DNC servers which were compromised by Grizzley Steppe. Also, they had done no investigation of their own on the topic, but had relied on a private firm (CrowdStrike) hired by the DNC. Showing how thorough an investigation the government had done (which was none), and thus how much value their opinion/report on the topic is. (NYT, WaPo and their readers ignore this key nugget).
The whole DNC/Administration/Press position on this, is so mock-worthy, there’s been a torrent of meme’s on the topic mocking the Hillary Clinton/NYT/WaPo position.