Point is --- that kind of intel doesn't generally get released to the public if it can be TRACED back to specific operatives or agents. Especially if they were sloppy enough to leave evidence of their methods. The whole point of gathering it is to hold it secret and use it as leverage in "negotiations". You could burn entire groups that collect that stuff by exposing it without cleaning up.
Looks to me like someone Internally burned the Kremlin. The way that Snowden did here in the US.
And it's not just one affair. You have Hillary's stupid ass home brewed system which I'm SURE was browsed by 4 or 6 foreign nations. Then you have the DNC hacks which were interesting but not even close to fatal for Clinton personally. And Finally, you have the idiot Podesta running an entire campaign out of Gmail account on his commercial phone. Those are all different stories. And the DNC and media are just balling them up into one big "Russia did it" excuse...
See I don't think so, and the reason is - there appears to be a long history of hacking attempts from Russia on us and other western governments aimed at election processes. Releasing it can influence things as much as holding it, especially through a proxy like Wikileaks.
We've been spying on Russian politicos for 35 years or more. This is from a book, not my "personal" experience, but in the 1980s we could tell you exactly how much Vodka the Kremlin was ordering and what brands. So if they were interested in where Podesta got his pizza from --- you shouldn't be surprised.
NONE of that info ever makes it to public domain unless someone gets blackmailed with it in exchange for negotiating concessions. That's what is "not right" about this "blame it on the Russians" deal..
You don't want the other guessing how they know what they know. Was it satellite interception, an antenna on an embassy, an asset working on the ground, a group for hire in Romania??? You don't want to widely EXPOSE those methods. Because they can be neutralized. And people could get killed.
I disagree. Russia was using Wikileaks to cover it's track. There is substantial agreement among diverse authorities that Russia was behind the hacking. There is zero evidence that it was the DNC insider. There is nothing substantial in the hacked emails - nothing outright illegal. What's there is stuff that can be implied, misconstrued or is embarressing. It's not "blackmail worthy" but it can - when released at strategic intervals - cause havoc.
WHICH hacking were they behind? The DNC hack was a simple spearfishing attack. ANYONE could have done it. Getting a Gmail account from a phone is a little trickier, but there were reports that Podesta had LOST a phone.
The assumption seems to be that ONLY the Russians were in those 3 separate attacks. But I assure you, there were other breaches on those stupid systems. There were just too tempting as targets.
In classified session, with the DNC and RNC, the FBI probably told them HOW MANY hacking attempts or successes had been made. It's not likely at all that ONLY the Russians were into those systems. And the only one of the 3 that had "the good stuff" on Clinton was Podesta's phone. And maybe the other "not publicly released" classified info that came from Clintons' "security workaround" server. But her lawyers and contractors damaged the evidence so badly on that one, that no can assess how many unauthorized leaks there were on that system.
Media and govt are wrapping all of these together in attempt to confuse folks..
The problem was -- DNC and Clinton and Podesta did not LISTEN to security advice. There's your fundamental issue..
