Are we in the 3rd Red Scare?

[Great2BAKnight2]

The amount of Anti-Russian media coverage seems to be increasing in spite of no evidence the Russians are actively doing anything against us.

The Washington Post has now been caught in a lie twice over anti-Russian stories.
1. "Fake News" - Link - Full retraction 2 weeks later in editor's note at beginning of story.
2. Russians hacked the Electric Grid - Link - WaPo rewrote the article after they were called out by the supposedly hacked utility company. Forbes wrote about the change. Link

Not to mention these:
1. Trump E-mail Server Connecting to Russia - Link - Intercept wrote about the lack of any substance in the claim. Link
2. Russians hacked the election. - Link - The Nation has a good piece explaining why skepticism is warranted. - Link.

Is this all an attempt to bury Trump due to his positive Putin position? Or is this the beginning of a 3rd Red Scare?

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

This is liberals grasping at every straw they can. Russia was a joke to them four years ago, now they're taking over the US.

 

[Ace of Knights]

The amount of Anti-Russian media coverage seems to be increasing in spite of no evidence the Russians are actively doing anything against us.

The Washington Post has now been caught in a lie twice over anti-Russian stories.
1. "Fake News" - Link - Full retraction 2 weeks later in editor's note at beginning of story.
2. Russians hacked the Electric Grid - Link - WaPo rewrote the article after they were called out by the supposedly hacked utility company. Forbes wrote about the change. Link

Not to mention these:
1. Trump E-mail Server Connecting to Russia - Link - Intercept wrote about the lack of any substance in the claim. Link
2. Russians hacked the election. - Link - The Nation has a good piece explaining why skepticism is warranted. - Link.

Is this all an attempt to bury Trump due to his positive Putin position? Or is this the beginning of a 3rd Red Scare?

Jesus Christ, are you people really that dim. Let me lay this out to you in black and white. Russia is not our friend. They actively engage in activities both overtly and covertly around the world to destroy American interests, democratic principles and the U.S. Economy. They would do anything they can to help Trump get elected because he is foreign policy novice who was sympathetic to Putin. In their eyes, the Russian global position just got that much stronger.

U.S. intelligence agencies are in 100% agreement that Russia attempted to influence the election. They hacked the DNC, and they hacked the RNC but only went after their threat in Hillary Clinton. If Rubio or Cruz was winning the Republican primaries, I guarantee you they would have went after them too in order to assist Putin's cheerleader Donald Trump. There may not be any "direct" links to the Russians because they are very good at what they do. Next your going to tell me the rebels slowly moving into Eastern Europe aren't Russian backed either? Make no mistake, these hackers many of whom the FBI has on their top 10 most wanted, are acting on state sponsored orders.

We now have a President who is openly chiding the Intelligence community for his own personal gain and is openly glorifying f*$king Julian Assange. Assange even had full reign on Sean Hannity's show the other night to completely push forward the pro-Russian agenda. Sean Hannity, on right leaning Fox News of all places interviewing known rapist and piece of shit hacker Julian Assange as he pushes his commie Russian agenda. Unbelievable. I don't know what the hell is happening in this country but you people need to wake up and realize this is very dangerous for America.

 

[Ace of Knights]

This is liberals grasping at every straw they can. Russia was a joke to them four years ago, now they're taking over the US.

Right... so John McCain and Lindsay Graham who pushed for harsher Russian sanctions are just liberals with an agenda as well. Got it. If you can't see that this is exactly what Putin wants because it turns intel into a partisan issue which weakens American interests, I don't know what to tell you because your blind.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

Right... so John McCain and Lindsay Graham who pushed for harsher Russian sanctions are just liberals with an agenda as well. Got it. If you can't see that this is exactly what Putin wants because it turns intel into a partisan issue which weakens American interests, I don't know what to tell you because your blind.

I have no problem with being tough on Russia, I never said anything to the contrary. I'm just pointing out that liberals only care about Russia now because it's something they can faux rage about. Where was Obama and Pelosi when they found out Russia was hacking the DNC a year ago, where were they when Russia invaded our ally Ukraine, where were they when Russia was slaughtering women and children in Syria by the thousand. Russia absolutely is our enemy and always has been, it's just funny that all of a sudden Russia is a huge threat because they leaked a bunch of emails about the DNC and Hillary being crooks, but not when they were murdering innocent civilians or when Romney warned they were our greatest threat four years ago.

 

[Ace of Knights]

I have no problem with being tough on Russia, I never said anything to the contrary. I'm just pointing out that liberals only care about Russia now because it's something they can faux rage about. Where was Obama and Pelosi when they found out Russia was hacking the DNC a year ago, where were they when Russia invaded our ally Ukraine, where were they when Russia was slaughtering women and children in Syria by the thousand. Russia absolutely is our enemy and always has been, it's just funny that all of a sudden Russia is a huge threat because they leaked a bunch of emails about the DNC and Hillary being crooks, but not when they were murdering innocent civilians or when Romney warned they were our greatest threat four years ago.

You won't get any argument from me there. This only became a hot button issue when a U.S election was threatened. It's become a partisan issue which is real problem because an attack on the U.S. did occur. But let's not kid ourselves there are several Trumpers on this board who just like our president elect would rather be playing patty-cake with Russia and picking fights with the intel community than hearing the facts about the situation. I'm glad to see you're not one of them.

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

I'm not sure how you took what I wrote and surmised that Russia is our friend that we should trust absolutely. I have no issue saying Russia is a competitor in the global political landscape. I do have an issue with heightened tensions when there's no evidence to support it. That's the point. The media has blasted the Russians every chance they've gotten, but been called out and proven a liar multiple times. There's a sentiment that Russia is the cause of our problems and it's ill-placed. Especially coming from a Democratic party that only has themselves to blame for losing the election.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

You won't get any argument from me there. This only became a hot button issue when a U.S election was threatened. It's become a partisan issue which is real problem because an attack on the U.S. did occur. But let's not kid ourselves there are several Trumpers on this board who just like our president elect would rather be playing patty-cake with Russia and picking fights with the intel community than hearing the facts about the situation. I'm glad to see you're not one of them.

I don't think the election was ever really threatened, that's where I disagree with all this faux raging. They weren't going to hack polling stations and change/cast votes, no one can do that unless they're in the room. They were using propaganda against Hillary sure, but every country does that, the US probably does it the most. Obama just did it in Israel trying to get rid of Netanyahu. They didn't share anything we didn't already know and really the Dems deserve a share of the blame. If they weren't so crooked and shady the hacked emails wouldn't have mattered.

 

[Ace of Knights]

I'm not sure how you took what I wrote and surmised that Russia is our friend that we should trust absolutely. I have no issue saying Russia is a competitor in the global political landscape. I do have an issue with heightened tensions when there's no evidence to support it. That's the point. The media has blasted the Russians every chance they've gotten, but been called out and proven a liar multiple times. There's a sentiment that Russia is the cause of our problems and it's ill-placed. Especially coming from a Democratic party that only has themselves to blame for losing the election.

Because there is absolutely evidence to support the heightened tensions we just haven't seen it and neither have the media. And we likely never will. High ranking well respected Republicans wouldn't be calling for even tougher sanctions otherwise. The evidence is all in the hands of the intel community. And why shouldn't the media blast Russia? They just meddled in a U.S election on the behalf of someone they believe will by sympathetic to the Russian agenda.

If the election results were reversed, and Russia attempted to influence the election towards Hillary (crazy, I know) wouldn't you still want the U.S. government and the media to go after Russia for their interference? I know I would.

 

[Ace of Knights]

I don't think the election was ever really threatened, that's where I disagree with all this faux raging. They weren't going to hack polling stations and change/cast votes, no one can do that unless they're in the room. They were using propaganda against Hillary sure, but every country does that, the US probably does it the most. Obama just did it in Israel trying to get rid of Netanyahu. They didn't share anything we didn't already know and really the Dems deserve a share of the blame. If they weren't so crooked and shady the hacked emails wouldn't have mattered.

Threatened probably wasn't the best word. Tampered with works better. And you're right, they weren't hacking polling stations. I'm not arguing that Hillary would have won even without Russian interference. She has a lifetime of political baggage that killed her.

But the fact that the President-elect is completely at odds and publicly calling out the intelligence community like a child because he doesn't want to believe the facts that the Russians were attacking his opponent is mind-boggling. The fact that he is now referring to Julian Assange to back him up is even more disgusting. The same wikileaks and its founder who has pretty much been attempting to hurt U.S. interests since its inception was just referenced by Trump and interviewed on the republican Fox News. That's just crazy to me.

 

[fabknight]

Threatened probably wasn't the best word. Tampered with works better. And you're right, they weren't hacking polling stations. I'm not arguing that Hillary would have won even without Russian interference. She has a lifetime of political baggage that killed her.

But the fact that the President-elect is completely at odds and publicly calling out the intelligence community like a child because he doesn't want to believe the facts that the Russians were attacking his opponent is mind-boggling. The fact that he is now referring to Julian Assange to back him up is even more disgusting. The same wikileaks and its founder who has pretty much been attempting to hurt U.S. interests since its inception was just referenced by Trump and interviewed on the republican Fox News. That's just crazy to me.

Speaking of which, I don't ever remember Julian Assange and Wikileaks ever attacking the Russians. Makes one wonder.

 

[CommuterBob]

Russia did not hack our election. That is an outright falsehood. Russia did hack the DNC and share emails with WikiLeaks, who published them. However, a large portion of the country never saw the news and certainly never read the emails, and really never cared what they said. The Dems are using Russia as a boogeyman because they didn't like that their laundry got aired. I would be willing to bet the hacked emails made a difference in less than 10,000 people's minds nationwide, as most were made up by that point anyway. It only served to make the Trumpers more mad as most Hillary supporters used their bias to justify it.

 

[Ace of Knights]

Russia did not hack our election. That is an outright falsehood. Russia did hack the DNC and share emails with WikiLeaks, who published them. However, a large portion of the country never saw the news and certainly never read the emails, and really never cared what they said. The Dems are using Russia as a boogeyman because they didn't like that their laundry got aired. I would be willing to bet the hacked emails made a difference in less than 10,000 people's minds nationwide, as most were made up by that point anyway. It only served to make the Trumpers more mad as most Hillary supporters used their bias to justify it.

This looking at it as a partisan issue has to stop. The U.S was attacked. It was the Dems this time (although the RNC was hacked too) but next time it could be the Republicans who are the target. I agree with Rubio and other smart republicans, that they need to stop glorifying Assange and wikileaks and look at it exactly as it is, an intrusion into U.S. affairs by foreign powers.

 

[UCFWayne]

"The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because…the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.” - President Obama Oct 22 2012.

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

Because there is absolutely evidence to support the heightened tensions we just haven't seen it and neither have the media. And we likely never will. High ranking well respected Republicans wouldn't be calling for even tougher sanctions otherwise. The evidence is all in the hands of the intel community. And why shouldn't the media blast Russia? They just meddled in a U.S election on the behalf of someone they believe will by sympathetic to the Russian agenda.

If the election results were reversed, and Russia attempted to influence the election towards Hillary (crazy, I know) wouldn't you still want the U.S. government and the media to go after Russia for their interference? I know I would.

So there's evidence for action but the media/people will never see it. I'm sorry but I just don't have that much trust and faith that our elected officials won't just do what their campaign financiers tell them to do. I have no problem with taking a harder stance on Russia but prove it. There has yet to be any real evidence. Even the DNC evidence that points to Russia is sketchy. That does not mean classified info has to be leaked to the public; it can be done through an independent review of the evidence. That has yet to happen.

As for your comment about the media and Russia. I would expect the media to report accurately, not sensationalize or fabricate stories that they later have to retract.

The outcome of the election and the partisan discussion has no bearing on my opinion. I didn't vote for Hillary or Trump. I just feel the government should be held to a higher standard and the American people shouldn't buy into rhetoric without justification.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

Normies normying

Boogey man testing to see what "enemy" they can convince dumb people's kids they need to die for some rich people.

 

[Happy Hands]

This could be a red scare, but we also pissed off the Chinese, which are yellow. Those two colors together make orange and that's how Trump was created.

 

[UCFKnight85]

This looking at it as a partisan issue has to stop. The U.S was attacked. It was the Dems this time (although the RNC was hacked too) but next time it could be the Republicans who are the target. I agree with Rubio and other smart republicans, that they need to stop glorifying Assange and wikileaks and look at it exactly as it is, an intrusion into U.S. affairs by foreign powers.

Assange is an asshole and a criminal. Period.

However, he's right on one thing- hacking the DNC wasn't f*cking hard. He has email evidence showing the dumbass Podesta clicking on phishing emails and SENDING HIS PASSWORD VIA EMAIL. This truly IS shit that teenagers used to pull until 99% of people realized what was going on and stopped responding.

As far as I can tell, Assange basically got into Podesta's emails. Right? I don't recall anything else of substance from really any other sources being leaked. Just a shit ton of Podesta emails, which at the time, were being laughed off by most everyone since the pundits were sure Hillary was winning either way.

Remember when these started leaking? Hillary's supposed "lead" actually INCREASED in the polls, at one point sitting over 10% despite these Podesta emails leaking out.

These only became an issue when she lost. Remember too that the White House knew about this effort on the DNC well, well in advance. In fact Tom Cotton offered to install a review board on just this matter back in early 2016, at which point the White House refused cooperation.

Where can you prove the RNC was hacked? They've said over and over that they weren't, which is highly plausible assuming they didn't have morons like Podesta clicking on phishing emails or running unsecured servers. Again- most everything out of WikiLeaks was from Podesta or tidbits from the DNC.

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

Where can you prove the RNC was hacked? They've said over and over that they weren't, which is highly plausible assuming they didn't have morons like Podesta clicking on phishing emails or running unsecured servers. Again- most everything out of WikiLeaks was from Podesta or tidbits from the DNC.

I agree with you. If you look at the Joint Analysis Report that was released with the White House statement, Grizzly Steppe is depicted as a basic Spear Phishing attack. That's defensible by diligent workers not clicking the link sent to them. The RNC would not need some sophisticated cyber defense system to prevent this same attack.

If you're interested in some of the analysis related to the Grizzly Steppe JAR, here's a pretty good article. http://anewdomain.net/2017/01/02/grizzly-steppe-heres-jerry-gamblin-ip-and-hash-analysis/

 

[UCFWayne]

Assange has said that the Russians werent the ones that gave him the emails. He is a known liar. However, its extremely possible that both obtained the emails through separate efforts. Remember, we only saw like 33k of the emails. Its reported there were some 60K+ that were taken.

As Assange has said, this was not a sophisticated hack. The guy gave his password away in a phishing scam and on top of that his computer wasnt that secure because 15 minutes with some easily obtained hacking tools wouldve done the same job. A state sponsored attack would be complete overkill.

 

[anon_x731qvsnsyb8i]

Good old-fashioned flow of logic:

Russia is run by the Russian Mob.

The Mob existed and profited well during the Soviet era.

The Russian Mob was uber-capitalist the whole time.

Nothing has changed, just their government.

That said. I don't care if Trump is part of the Mob either...the fact remains, if averting combat with Russia is most important. Then...

People should be happy that Trump and Putin are bedfellows...I don't care WHAT benefits they get...there is no war.

Obama is simply showing off his neo-con desires I guess...

 

[Great2BAKnight2]

Assange has said that the Russians werent the ones that gave him the emails. He is a known liar. However, its extremely possible that both obtained the emails through separate efforts. Remember, we only saw like 33k of the emails. Its reported there were some 60K+ that were taken.

As Assange has said, this was not a sophisticated hack. The guy gave his password away in a phishing scam and on top of that his computer wasnt that secure because 15 minutes with some easily obtained hacking tools wouldve done the same job. A state sponsored attack would be complete overkill.

Bingo. This was even pointed out by skeptics back when the "evidence" first arose. Dr. Sandro Gaycken, a strategic advisor to NATO, had the most concise explanation (source):

A critical look exposes the significant flaws in the attribution. First, all of the technical evidence can be spoofed. Although some argue that spoofing the mound of uncovered evidence is too much work, it can easily be done by a small team of good attackers in three or four days. Second, the tools used by Cozy Bear appeared on the black market when they were first discovered years ago and have been recycled and used against many other targets, including against German industry. The reuse and fine-tuning of existing malware happens all the time. Third, the language, location settings, and compilation metadata can easily be altered by changing basic settings on the attacker’s computer in five minutes without the need of special knowledge. None of technical evidence is convincing. It would only be convincing if the attackers used entirely novel, unique, and sophisticated tools with unmistakable indicators pointing to Russia supported by human intelligence, not by malware analysis.

The DNC attackers also had very poor, almost comical, operational security (OPSEC). State actors tend to have a quality assurance review when developing cyberattack tools to minimize the risk of discovery and leaving obvious crumbs behind. Russian intelligence services are especially good. They are highly capable, tactically and strategically agile, and rational. They ensure that offensive tools are tailored and proportionate to the signal they want to send, the possibility of disclosure and public perception, and the odds of escalation. The shoddy OPSEC just doesn’t fit what we know about Russian intelligence.