SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A Russian hacker accused of stealing from Russian banks reportedly confessed in court that he hacked the U.S. Democratic National Committee (DNC) and stole Hillary Clinton's emails under the direction of agents from Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB).
According to Russian news site The Bell, Konstantin Kozlovsky, a Russian citizen working for a hacker group called Lurk, confessed to hacking Clinton's emails during a hearing about his arrest in August. An audio recording and minutes from the hearing were posted on Kozlovsky's Facebook page, and their authenticity was reportedly confirmed by The Bell.
In a handwritten letter that also appears in a photo on his Facebook page, Kozlovsky admits to hacking the DNC on the orders of an FSB agent he called "Ilya."
Putin Ordered Theft Of Clinton's Emails From DNC, Russian Hacker Confesses
(Score: 5, Informative) by fishybell on Thursday December 14 2017, @03:51PM (12 children)
While the DNC's pushing aside of Bernie Sanders in favor of not-yet-the-nominee Hillary Clinton was a huge scandal, and absolutely not okay, I'm not sure I've heard anything from these hacks that showed anything else.
What corruption do you speak of?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Thursday December 14 2017, @04:57PM (11 children)
The media and DNC and Establishment have been crying up and down and five ways to Sunday about a theory where Russians may have influenced the Presidential election by buying ads on Facebook and astro-turfing social media, and they have been ginning it up into a veritable casus belli, but actual proof that the Clintons and DNC rigged the process for the Democratic nomination for Hillary in that same Presidential election does not rise to the same level for you as to merit the appellation, "corruption?"
Please think about what you wrote.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday December 14 2017, @05:24PM (3 children)
That's right. Because primaries and the general election are TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS. There is no comparison. Stop with your whaddabouthillaryisms already!
(Also don't you dare start talking about other countries spending many many times more than that on directly bribing^wlobbying congress. NOTTHESAMETHING)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by number6x on Thursday December 14 2017, @06:59PM (2 children)
Very good point!
The political parties in the US are not part of our government. They are private organizations. Their primaries are run in order for these private organizations to pick the candidates that they wish to have run in the real election, the general election.
Somehow these private organizations have scammed all of us tax payers to foot the bill for their primaries.
We don't pay the bill when the Elk's Club elects its leaders. How about the suburban subdivivion's homeowner's board, a nearby Plumber's union Business Agent election, Or maybe an office holder at a local country club? They all take care of their own elections.
The republican party and the democratic party are private organizations of individuals, just like the teamsters union, the Kiwanis club, or a local Alchoholics Anonymous chapter is.
They are not limited by the constitution and they are not regulated by the laws that cover government entities. When the DNC or the RNC break their own rules and procedures, they are not breaking federal laws.
There are laws that do regulate the activities of the parties. In the same way there are laws that require the local country club to maintain cleanliness standards in their kitchens, and to not violate laws like discrimination laws, accounting laws, or tax laws.
I laugh every time a politician complains about how labor unions are just artificial and are preventing workers from taking control of their own careers (an argument often made in favor of 'right to work' laws used to bust up unions). The political parties are just as 'artificial' as are labor unions.
However, the parties are real and we must deal with them. If the two major parties in the US were to collapse, new parties would rise to replace them. There is a benefit to pooling your resources in order to support common causes. Our two current parties are so powerful and entrenched they have basically become a 'shadow' government. The only realistic way for candidates to gain office is to sign on to one of the two existing platforms. If the new candidate is not already rich and powerful, they will have to toe the party line and be a good lap dog to the party leadership if they want to keep getting the financial backing of the party.
Party leadership is not elected by the general public but by party members, they are not beholden to the citizens, they are not limited by the Constitution, as the federal government is, but yet they hold enormous power over the people who rule this country.
Fortunately, we have a solution. Get off your butt, and vote the bums out of office. Keep doing that until you find one who actually works for you.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14 2017, @07:43PM (1 child)
Of course, the reason why public money goes into running party elections is because 19th century society thought that otherwise parties would just degenerate to nominating candidates via backroom deals among the powerful. :)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14 2017, @11:00PM
Sure, as opposed to them nominating candidates via backroom deals with a public funded charade.. that's better how?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by sjames on Thursday December 14 2017, @07:53PM (6 children)
Personally, I find the attempted coronation of Clinton to be a betrayal of the people. I find that whole process corrupt.
BUT having said that, at the end of the day the DNC primary is nowhere near the same thing as the general presidential election. The DNC was within it's rights legally to do what it did (and I within mine to not vote for Clinton) even though it was unethical. The DNC did not bring in a foreign power to influence the process of democracy in the United States at arm's length or otherwise. There is at least an order of magnitude difference.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 14 2017, @10:30PM (2 children)
Consider the Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr.
She was on a list of people blocked from entering the USA. She was given a waiver. She met with democrats, went off to be purposely caught talking with Trump Jr., and then met with democrats again. Her whole reason for being here was to justify a warrant to wiretap Trump Tower.
There you go, the only evidence of bringing in a foreign power to influence the process of democracy in the United States. It's democrats.
(Score: 3, Touché) by sjames on Friday December 15 2017, @12:01AM (1 child)
Time to put the crack pipe down. I know you're desperate, but the crack won't help.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 15 2017, @12:24AM
No, no. Also those 16 women and the pussy grabbing tape, that was all allowed to happen to frame the President.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Pav on Friday December 15 2017, @07:43AM (2 children)
The "hacker" in question ALSO said in his testimony that he was also asked to create a "big red button" to destroy all western I.T infrustructure, but he didn't because of "ethical" reasons. Yeah, cred personified.
Bill Binney (high level NSA cryptomathematician and whistleblower), Edward Snowden and others have given technical reasons why the dump definitely wasn't a hack : timestamps, NSA not releasing any logs, three letter agencies equivocating (eg. "moderately confident", "highly confident" etc...) so they can backtrack if need be. The Russia narrative was even dropped after a year by the mainstream media, and there was a pivot towards "collusion"... because the word "conspiracy" has a bad smell about it these days.
I'm definitely no Trump fan, but his only issue is he is incompetent when pushing stock standard US policy. eg. he was criticised by the left (namely Democrat leader Chuck Shumer) for not moving the embassy to Jerusalem quick enough. Both Hillary and Obama have said Jerusalem is and always will be Israels capital.
(Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Saturday December 16 2017, @03:26AM (1 child)
The NSA not releasing something constitutes evidence? The organization that didn't even admit it existed for years?
TLAs not willing to give a firm answer? You don't say!
(Score: 2) by Pav on Saturday December 16 2017, @06:54AM
When pressed even members of the senate security committee were forced to admit there was no evidence.