Russian Hacker vs. DNC leaks copy

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

What happened? 

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:

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: 

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) –

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.