"Sad statemwent."
True statement - it's what they do, and it's why businesses call them in and pay them a lot of money when they know or suspect that they have been hacked. Our government agencies are probably a couple of steps behind them on the technology side in some cases, and definitely behind them in terms of restrictions on what they can look at and when - CrowdStrike doesn't need bureaucratic paperwork to examine a server, they just need permission.
"Sometimes I wonder if they got the idea of election meddling and regime change from us."
I could go on explaining the difference between what we've done in the past and what they did this year, but I think it will fall on deaf ears.
The report is clear - have you read it? The evidence is clear.
The only one who seems to have a problem with it is Trump, and that could be because he's afraid it could question the legitimacy of his election. Even his spokespeople today stated that he accepted the conclusions, but he has not actually said that because his ego wouldn't allow it to be true - he won the election because he's Donald J. Trump and didn't need anyone else's help.
To be clear, the report does NOT say that Russia actually had an effect on the election; it says they TRIED to do so. The Trump camp is pointing at this as proof that nothing actually happened, which is nothing more than whistling past the graveyard; we already knew that, but the fact that they even tried is a concern for national security. Trump and his team simply don't get it, which does not bode well for the next four years of foreign policy. |
