SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the Quis-custodiet-ipsos-custodes? dept.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Hackers from the Dutch intelligence service AIVD have provided the FBI with crucial information about Russian interference with the American elections. For years, AIVD had access to the infamous Russian hacker group Cozy Bear. That's what de Volkskrant and Nieuwsuur have uncovered in their investigation.
It's the summer of 2014. A hacker from the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD has penetrated the computer network of a university building next to the Red Square in Moscow, oblivious to the implications. One year later, from the AIVD headquarters in Zoetermeer, he and his colleagues witness Russian hackers launching an attack on the Democratic Party in the United States. The AIVD hackers had not infiltrated just any building; they were in the computer network of the infamous Russian hacker group Cozy Bear. And unbeknownst to the Russians, they could see everything.
That's how the AIVD becomes witness to the Russian hackers harassing and penetrating the leaders of the Democratic Party, transferring thousands of emails and documents. It won't be the last time they alert their American counterparts. And yet, it will be months before the United States realize what this warning means: that with these hacks the Russians have interfered with the American elections. And the AIVD hackers have seen it happening before their very eyes.
The Dutch access provides crucial evidence of the Russian involvement in the hacking of the Democratic Party, according to six American and Dutch sources who are familiar with the material, but wish to remain anonymous. It's also grounds for the FBI to start an investigation into the influence of the Russian interference on the election race between the Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and the Republican candidate Donald Trump.
Translated by: Lisa Negrijn
It's quite an interesting read.
(Score: 1, Troll) by khallow on Monday January 29 2018, @05:05PM (4 children)
And look who then rants about Republicans for the rest of their post. Kool aid drinkers only care about interference and collusion when it happens to the other side.
Where's the evidence? I'll note the key problem - no evidence of illegal collusion (note that some forms of collusion would be legal, BTW) between the Trump campaign and anyone on the Russian side.
There are two points to bring up. First, it's easy to insinuate illegal collusion, but hard to show. Contacts with Russians are commonplace. They're a big country and most of the people involved would meet with a number of Russians routinely as part of their jobs. Similar links can be made to the Clintons, for example, a speaking engagement [snopes.com] by Bill Clinton which netted half a million dollars, was used as the basis for an accusation that Hillary Clinton was colluding with the Russians. Given that significant money was actually exchanged in Russia, that seems a somewhat less vapid basis for accusation than what's been geared against the Trump administration.
Another example is the infamous ATF "gunwalking" scandal [wikipedia.org]. Superficially, it's almost 2000 high quality weapons and perhaps more importantly, unchecked smuggling of said firearms (including who knows what with those firearms) into Mexico mostly to the Sinaloa cartel. Further, there probably have been dozens of contacts between the Sinaloa cartel and agents who were managing the gunwalking program over the two or so years it was in existence. Does that mean that some in the Obama administration was colluding with the Sinaloa cartel? While it's hard to show that Obama officials would have profited from such an arrangement, it's not hard to see how they would do so, via bribes or political advantage (for example, if it weren't for the blowback of a border agent dying in a firefight involving two of these weapons, the situation might have been used to rationalize gun control legislation).
There are more where those came from. One probably can find similar examples from any administration going back to the dawn of the US.
Notice the jump in logic that happens in each of these three cases. We have this vague sense of connection between political opponents and some outsider who benefits or might benefit from actions of the opponents. If that were enough to jail people, we would have sent a number of Obama officials to jail. It's not. Therefore, you need more than that in order to put people in prison for the alleged illegal collusion. Perhaps, this can be done though I see that no one has succeeded so far. The people currently indicted [wikipedia.org] have been either for actions they allegedly performed before becoming part of the campaign and subsequent administration or for lying to the FBI. (The two that have been charged with lying to the FBI have plead guilty, but not the rest.)
Past experience with such scandals indicates that they are unlikely to go anywhere. It's certainly not an adequate basis for a Trump supporter to change their mind.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 29 2018, @08:10PM (3 children)
Nice to see you ignore the last part: "I suppose there are still a few sincere, principled Republicans, the ones who believe in personal responsibility and restraint with the free handouts and similar philosophies. And, oh yeah, the Rule of Law."
Hey, how else would you justify yet another wall of bullshit? Perhaps instead of fighting the good (partisan) fight you should hear the valid points and incorporate them into a larger discussion where you can make your own valid points about scandals. We need to unearth the baddies, not fight each other.
Woops, I forgot, Khallow IS one of the baddies. No amount of logic and reason can fight a person's choice to be bad. You'll have to work doubly hard to convince anyone otherwise. Well except the other RWNJs that mod you up.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 30 2018, @03:10AM (2 children)
Of course, I did. It's just more of the same.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @06:15PM (1 child)
Which is the same reason we trash your nonsense over and over.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:48PM
And since the last bit wasn't sincere nor furthered any rational discussion, it should have been ignored. I then did so.