Russia hacked U.S. presidential election for Trump, says CIA

Investigators believe a local contractor in California was the target of a hackers, but the systems accessed weren’t related the elections, U.S. officials said.

So, no. The only people interfering with who gets to vote with malicious intent are the various secretaries of state, largely GOP ones.

In reply to @Bozobub: No, this is not OK by me. I’m a Westphalian sovereignty kinda guy. But in the context of realpolitik, what the 'States are experiencing right now is what they’ve been up to for ages. And, like the rest of the planet, you have to grin and bear it, and factor into your considerations that things you read could be malicious manipulations by foreign interests (instead of malicious manipulations by domestic interests) or could not be. And you’ll never know. Because, face it, we don’t know if the Russians interfered materially. And we likely won’t know because anyone reporting on it is, de facto, an interested party and, to make matters better, one that has a record of lying with malice and forethought.

This is the world you built for the rest of us. Not fun actually living in it, is it?

In reply to @gracchus and @Nobby_Stiles regarding sockpuppets: I’ve said this ages ago and I’ll say it again: the accusation of sockpuppetry is a dangerous thing and especially close to poisoning the well. It is possible to be entirely pro-Russian on your own time. It’s possible to agree with Russian policy in some respects and not others, and it is possible to think poorly of American policy and think that, in comparison to it, Russian policy is often merely “utterly awful” as opposed to “unspeakably foul.” And it is just as easy to to accuse anyone holding any of these positions of being a sockpuppet and thus, explaining why they shouldn’t be listened to or engaged with.

In reply to @anon67050589 regarding vote supression

Let’s not forget how many millions of voters were kept from voting due to the various methods specifically designed to keep potential Democrats from the polls. How many hundreds of polling places where minorities live were closed after the absentee voting deadline had expired in those states?

My point exactly! That this election is a screwjob is of course, true. It’s been that way for ages. But I think it is mainly a domestic screwjob.

@vonbobo

Putin will take the Baltics in the coming four years.

Bet you he won’t. He didn’t even take Eastern Ukraine despite having a very pro-Russian majority there with a powerful separatist movement that’s in de facto control of the area. And even what he took (Crimea, which is a rather special case, historically) he only did after the US backed a coup.

Putin ain’t nice, but he isn’t stupid, either, and he’s been entirely reactive so far.

@MikeR

It’s part of a plan to show the home audience that Western democracy is weak and that authoritarian ‘managed’ democracy is the best way forward.

Have you seen a single solitary shred of evidence that Putin even has an ideology, let alone even so much as a passing desire to spread it? Did you just take the talking points from the Cold War era and do a quick search-and-replace?

Putin’s media can now run stories portraying the American population as weak, divided and distrustful of their system whilst their leaders are corrupt and easily manipulated.

I keep an eye on a few Russian media outlets and I can tell you, they say mean things about America way less than American media say mean things about Russia. Do you have any evidence for all of this?

Meanwhile he’s pouring money into anti-EU, nationalist, xenophobic and outright fascist parties across Europe to forment anti-government, separatist sentiments to weaken opposition to Russian actions in Eastern Europe.

Evidence? I swear to all that’s holy you are rehashing the Global Communist Conspiracy stuff from the 1950s.

Put in has worked out how to make a culturally and ideologically bankrupt country

Neoliberal capitalism is ideologically bankrupt? I mean, yes, it is, but that’s an accusation that’s hardly unique to Russia.

Or did you forget they aren’t Communist anymore?

@Enkita

Nothing at all to do with the success of the banks in increasing inequality and the US in invading Iraq and so leading to a regional refugee crisis?

Goodness no. It’s all masterminded by Putin who’s so evil he has several white Persian cats to stroke at all times. /s

I’ve had it to my back teeth with defending Putin. I don’t like him I agree with precisely none of his politics, but with everyone really happy about reanimating the corpse of Joe McCarthy and putting it in charge of public discourse I have to say something.

@jerwin

I have friends in Russia some of which are and some of which aren’t Putin supporters and they all agree on what would improve relations with them to no end: “Please stop waving that gun in my face.” As far as I can work out, that’s all they want. Because having the missile shield (which is different from short-range ballistic missile launchers largely in marketing) right up to your borders is really scary.

5 Likes

Why wouldn’t the US have the right to limit its own trade with Russia? I think most people besides the most extreme neoliberals would take it for granted that countries would have that right, even if they differed on what justified exercising it.

If the State Department were to ask me, I’d say the US should be consistent. I wasn’t consulted, though. If I were I’d make human rights violations in the US a larger priority, but would also be okay with sanctions since I’m an absolutist on human rights violations being unacceptable.

Anyway I was more making a list of motivations, than trying to offer moral justifications for those motivations.

6 Likes

That depends entirely on the question being asked.

This was engineered:

So was this:

One was only intended to - and only did - work once. The other has, so far, lasted 2050 years. Both were “engineered”, and both brilliantly met their engineering specification.

Edit: Oh, FFS. The URL of the images keeps auto changing :rage:

5 Likes

I read his bio with interest. Exxon is a totally amoral company which wants in on oil wherever it can be exploited. There’s a lot of oil in the Arctic. So Tillerson, quite logically, chums up with the people who control that oil. When sanctions get in the way of the business deal, he argues that sanctions don’t achieve anything, which is what all businessmen everywhere say when their deals are stopped by sanctions.
Do I like this Republican Realpolitik? No, but I have no power to influence it. Tillerson’s record on human rights seems better than that of many Republicans; he might be socially middle of the road. Do I actually think he’s really a mate of Putin? Not for a moment. He has alliances. In WW2 the UK, the US and Russia were allies, which meant that the one thing we could agree on was that we were on a different side from Germany (not Japan, even.) Roosevelt despised Churchill, Churchill thought Stalin was twisting Roosevelt round his little finger, Stalin despised both of them. But between them they fixed Nazi Germany.
Things do seem to be getting a bit McCarthyite again.

2 Likes

Your post said what I’ve been trying to say, but much better than I could.

3 Likes

Don’t mind that at all.
I do mind our farmers suffering because the US forced the same sanctions down the throat of the EU.

I think I must be missing the point here. The CEO of ExxonMobil has a record on human rights?

1 Like

I guess you can argue his company does? What have their done in their economic interest which has endangered the human or civil rights of others?

3 Likes

Look, when you social engineer a network, the goal is to get one employee to make one mistake which you can exploit. Luck is involved. If the scheme collapses after you’ve established a technological foothold, it shouldn’t matter,
When you engineer a rocket, you design luck out of the system. because if the machine doesn’t work, people die.

3 Likes

Ah, I had been talking about the 2012 sanctions the US imposed in the Magnitsky Act, not EU sanctions for human rights abuses in 2012. I don’t know anything about those and said nothing about them.

Certainly the US has not been a perfect, just, or fair actor in its relations with Russia (or any other nation) on many fronts, and I haven’t suggested it. Again, I was more making a list of motivations for Putin’s ire against Clinton, than trying to offer moral justifications for those motivations.

1 Like

Maybe there’s this?

3 Likes

[quote=“jerwin, post:110, topic:90927”]
Look, when you social engineer a network, the goal is to …[/quote]

Do you really want to have another “hack” vs “influence” argument in this thread?

A social engineering attack could be either to gain short term advantage or acquire a singular piece of knowledge (single use/Saturn V/Stuxnet), or it could be to create an enduring advantage or access (lasting/Pons Fabricus/Ultra or Fortitude). As I said, it depends entirely on the question asked.

4 Likes

Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but what the heck. The first quote here is from Donald Trump; the second is from Steve Bannon. In light of Russia directly helping the man get elected, it’s helpful to remember his stated goal as president:

12 Likes

You’re reply was too good for just a like. Thanks for the info. I knew that Putin didn’t like Clinton from her days as Secretary of State, but you laid it all out well. Thanks. I should have added
"revenge" as a reason.

5 Likes

Do you have a link to the full article?

because they are fellow fascists, not communists.

5 Likes

Seems odd to destroy the conservative establishment by giving them what they want and putting them all in uncontested power, but maybe not.

One big grift can take it all down and enrich oneself in the process.

8 Likes

Perhaps by “Conservative Establishment” he means the old style conservatives that wouldn’t let him in the door as distinct from the new far-right neoliberals that he associates with. The Koch brothers, for instance, are not old money; the basis of their assets goes back less than 100 years and is in technology, not land.
I’m reminded of a former Austrian corporal who fooled a very old aristocracy into letting him a government, then sidelined them completely and handed all the power over to people like a former wine salesman and a film producer.

4 Likes

Oh, I agree, and I wish we’d hadn’t. I don’t know whether the world would be better or worse at this point if we hadn’t meddled with other countries, but it wasn’t right.

But I also agree with the poster who wrote “this is taking meddling to another whole level” (sorry, can’t find the quote). It’s one nuclear superpower screwing with the political direction of another. This could have immense, world-wide consequences. I am frightened of a world-girdling corporate kleptocratic fascism. That doesn’t help the people in Iran, Venezuela, or whoever we’ve screwed over the years, but a devious US-Russia partnership could affect not only them, but just about everyone on the planet.

My two cents. Which is probably what a dollar will be worth in a few years.:anguished:

10 Likes

Ah, the Buckley old guard that semi-battled the new crop of Bircher scum?

I could see why the new GOP elite would want to go after them, though I’ve seen very little competition there.

1 Like