The Russians are coming! – Not.


"  … the decentralized nature of U.S. polling would make it extraordinarily difficult to subvert a nationwide race. Instead, U.S. officials said it is more likely that Russia would use hacking tools to expose or fabricate signs of vote-rigging, aiming to delegitimize an election outcome that Republican candidate Donald Trump has said he may refuse to accept if he does not win.

I think it’s correct to say the Russians don’t think they can dictate the outcome,” said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. But even as votes are being tallied Tuesday, Schiff said, Russian intelligence services are likely to be “looking through their troves of hacked documents and seeing what they can release.”"  Washpost


The truth in this piece is that the IC does not believe Russia has the power to disrupt a US election.  pl

This entry was posted in Politics, Russia. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to The Russians are coming! – Not.

  1. bemildred says:

    It reminds me of Erdogan’s witch hunt for Kurds more than anything, the Russophobia: in both cases, much the same need to deflect from domestic failure and corruption with foreign enemies.
    And a bit of preventive and preparatory deflection against the stuff still coming out, too. If the Russians did it, we don’t have to talk about the content.
    I just don’t think the Russians would waste their time trying to manipulate our politics, they can never compete with the Sauds and the Israelis, and the Corporations, and we make a lousy ally these days anyway. Being our friend can be more dangerous than being a low-priority enemy.

  2. bemildred says:

    Indeed not.

  3. Harry says:

    I agree but I would love to understand the best counter case. What I have seen is twaddle and I’m sure there is a more sensible case out there somewhere.

  4. bemildred says:

    Counter case for what argument, what you mean seems ambiguous to me and I don’t want to go off on some tangent. If I know what you mean, I might try to construct a counter-argument.

  5. LondonBob says:

    Funny how the Israel Firsters accuse the Russians of doing exactly what they are actually doing.

  6. bob mount says:

    Here is the latest on voting machine software corruption in the US:

  7. J says:

    Now is this an I/O piece or what:
    U.S. Govt. Hackers Ready to Hit Back If Russia Tries to Disrupt Election
    “U.S. military hackers have penetrated Russia’s electric grid, telecommunications networks and the Kremlin’s command systems, making them vulnerable to attack by secret American cyber weapons should the U.S. deem it necessary, according to a senior intelligence official and top-secret documents reviewed by NBC News”
    Now my question, ‘if’ NBC News was allowed access/viewing of the so-called TS documents, then ‘somebiddy’ in (DNI, Cyber Command, ??) is guilty of illegally disclosing TS, and should have their butts reamed at the same time they’re being carried away in shackles & leg-irons.
    This NBC News story stinks to high heaven, and the dangerous part is that a lot in the public believe these type of crap stories.

  8. J says:

    Here’s another ‘good one’, the Pentagon has a slush fund for the ‘war on terror’. (Whatever happened to the DOD IG identified $6.5 Trillion missing unaccounted for funds?).
    Now it appears that their slush fund is now being re-directed towards war with Russia.
    The article notes that since 911, the various wars have cost taxpayers $5.1 Trillion.

  9. Chris Chuba says:

    Russian election hack narrative doesn’t make sense
    Identity theft or election fraud by one of the two major parties (ahem, Democrats) look like more plausible motives for the previous hacks on the voter registration databases. Given the numerous stories that we have all heard over the years, how would infiltrating voter databases even work to discredit U.S. elections?
    DNC / Podesta hacks
    Here is a Reuters story on these hacks that confirms my skepticism on the quick resolution of this investigation that conveniently concluded in time for the debates with Hillary’s ‘Trump is a Kremlin stooge’ narrative. They cite that previous investigations took longer and were less conclusive. They also give specific examples of why it is dangerous to threaten the Russians with cyber retaliation for something they did not do.
    Same pre-Iraq war group think and rushed investigation
    “CrowdStrike took just a month or so before it conclusively determined that Russia’s FSB, … were behind it. … By October, the intelligence community made it unanimous.
    That speed and certainty contrasts sharply with a previous suspected Russian hack in 2010, when the target was the Nasdaq stock market. According to an extensive investigation by Bloomberg Businessweek in 2014, the NSA and FBI made numerous mistakes over many months that stretched to nearly a year.

    “After months of work,” the article said, “there were still basic disagreements in different parts of government over who was behind the incident and why.” There was no consensus­, with just a 70 percent certainty that the hack was a cybercrime.

    [in this case] Despite the rushed, incomplete investigation and unanswered questions, the Obama administration has announced its decision to retaliate against Russia.”

Comments are closed.