The former acting director of the CIA has called the Russian cyberattack “the political equivalent of 9/11.”
I was surprised to read in the New York Times that when the FBI discovered the Russian attack in September 2015, it failed to send even a single agent to warn senior Democratic National Committee officials. Instead, messages were left with the DNC IT “help desk.” As a former head of the FBI cyber division told the Times, this is a baffling decision[…]
What takes this from baffling to downright infuriating is that at nearly the exact same time that no one at the FBI could be bothered to drive 10 minutes to raise the alarm at DNC headquarters, two agents accompanied by attorneys from the Justice Department were in Denver visiting a tech firm that had helped maintain Clinton’s email server.
Comparing the FBI’s massive response to the overblown email scandal with the seemingly lackadaisical response to the very real Russian plot to subvert a national election shows that something is deeply broken at the FBI.
But the FBI’s role is particularly troubling because of its power and responsibility — and because this is part of a trend. The Justice Department’s Inspector General issued a damning report this summer about the FBI’s failure to prioritize cyberthreats more broadly.
Finally, Congress should more vigorously exercise its oversight to determine why the FBI responded overzealously in the Clinton case and insufficiently in the Russian case. The FBI should also clarify whether there is an ongoing investigation into Trump, his associates and their ties to Russia. If ever there were a case of “intense public interest,” this is it. What’s broken in the FBI must be fixed and quickly.
Beyond that we are ever so vulnerable to cyberattacks and hacking. See the quote below,
In assessing Donald Trump’s presidential victory, Americans continue to look away from this election’s most alarming story: the successful effort by a hostile foreign power to manipulate public opinion before the vote.
U.S. intelligence agencies have affirmed that the Russian government directed the illegal hacking of private email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and prominent individuals. The emails were then released by WikiLeaks, which has benefited financially from a Russian state propaganda arm, used Russian operatives for security and made clear an intent to harm the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.
Plenty of Americans obviously bought into the propaganda, even those on the left where people were quick to believe and hold onto the claim that the election was rigged against Bernie Sanders.
News stories on the DNC emails released in July served to disrupt the Democratic National Convention, instigate political infighting and suggest for some supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — without any real proof — that the Democratic primary had been “rigged” against their candidate.
Russian (and former communist) propaganda has traditionally worked exactly this way: The more you “report” something negatively, the more the negative is true. Trump and supportive media outlets adopted the technique and reveled in information gained from the illegal Russian hacking (as well as many “fake news” stories that evidence suggests were generated by Russian intelligence operations) to make exaggerated claims (“Hillary wants to open borders to 600 million people!”) or to accuse Clinton of illegality, corruption and, ironically, treasonous behavior.
The email operation increased negative stories about Clinton, fueled an immense propaganda attack and diminished coverage of actual issues. The large polling lead Clinton gained after the debates slipped significantly under this barrage of negativity
Electors are demanding an intelligence briefing on Russia’s interference before they vote on Monday.
the Constitution envisions the Electoral College as a deliberative body that plays a critical role in our system of government — ensuring that the American people elect a president who is constitutionally qualified and fit to serve. Accordingly, to fulfill our role as Electors, we seek an informed and unrestrained opportunity to fulfill our constitutional role leading up to December 19th — that is, the ability to investigate, discuss, and deliberate with our colleagues about whom to vote for in the Electoral College.
We further emphasize Alexander Hamilton’s assertion in Federalist Paper #68 that a core purpose of the Electoral College was to prevent a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.” The United States intelligence community has now concluded with “high confidence” that a foreign power, namely Russia, acted covertly to interfere in the presidential campaign with the intent of promoting Donald Trump’s candidacy.
The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations. We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States.
The title is not an exaggeration, that is exactly what our intelligence agencies have said.
Russia actively worked to get Trump elected and to undermine Hillary’s campaign. A foreign nation worked to put someone they want into power in our country. Russia has attacked the legitimacy of our democracy.
This is terrifying. Are you not freaking out? How are you not freaking out?
Remember how Hillary’s Wall Street speeches were a deal breaker? Because that obviously meant she was their puppet. Because you know, that’s how paid speeches work.
Well, guess who Trump has tapped to be Secretary of Treasury?
Steven Mnuchin, a Goldman trader turned hedge fund manager and Hollywood financier [NYT]
Here are how some of Donald’s followers are reacting
More information here
This is my opinion, not sourced from other places.
I think it is really interesting how the Clinton Foundation was such a big issue during the campaign. Conflicts of interest, corruption, etc. Extra interesting because the Clintons have never drawn a salary from the charity, so any ‘suspicious’ donations went toward their philanthropic goals and not personal enrichment. [Really, they don’t]
The whole time there were these glaring issues on the other side that no one talked about. The Trump company and brand are all over the freaking world. AND, they are Donald’s livelihood, as well as his children’s. So obviously, anything done in support of the brand is automatically personal enrichment for the Trumps. That is super shady.
There are plenty of reasons why there was focus on HRC’s conflicts of interest during the election. The majority of them are problematic (again, my opinion). But it is pretty hypocritical for the Trump camp to have focused so much on the Clinton Foundation being evidence of corruption when the Trump brand is a walking talking conflict.
As I have mentioned in other posts, it doesn’t even matter if Trump does not try to use his new position to benefit himself (I mean come on, he’s not that humble or honest, he totes would) because other nations and politicians could use the business to get on the good side of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. That should make you worried and uncomfortable.