Ex-FBI agent warns that Russia hasn't stopped cyber attacks and the US is doing nothing about it
Source: Raw Story
Brad Reed
27 Dec 2017 at 08:36 ET
Clinton Watts, a former FBI Special Agent who is now a senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, warned MSNBCs Morning Joe that Russia is still launching cyber attacks aimed at disrupting American democracy.
A Morning Joe panel on Wednesday began by reading an op-ed written in the Washington Post by former acting CIA Director Mike Morell and former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, who argue that Russia hasnt at all stopped its efforts to interfere with American elections by pushing propaganda through social media.
The Kremlin playbook never stopped, Watts explained. For a non-election year, its about audience sustainment and infiltration
You pick an audience that you really want to cozy up to, and you just repeat what they say.
<snip>
Even more disturbing, he said, is that the United States government isnt doing anything to counter these efforts.
Read more: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/12/ex-fbi-agent-warns-that-russia-hasnt-stopped-cyber-attacks-and-the-us-is-doing-nothing-about-it/
dewsgirl
(14,961 posts)Government that will help and encourage them if they think they can get away with it.
DBoon
(22,391 posts)Why would they want to stop it?
C_U_L8R
(45,014 posts)Nor his Republican conspirators.
FarPoint
(12,425 posts)tRump has no desire to change this ....none what so ever!
GusBob
(7,286 posts)There is plenty of blame to go around for letting it happen going back to the previous administration
The greater blame is that nothing has been done about it once discovered
Igel
(35,337 posts)Problem is, the president and his SOS du jour were still trying for "reset", trying not to let things get out of control over Crimea/Donbass, trying not to have to backtrack over Russia's being an adversary.
The other problem is trying to figure out what to do about it. The 2nd amendment could easily be used to let people have weapons to either commit crimes or start an insurgency. The 1st amendment could easily be used to cause division and promote hate or to foment sedition.
Part of the "game" is studiously ignored. Before the Russians supported Trump, they supported anybody-but-Hillary--which, after the primary, is easily identical with "pro-Trump", and which was a conclusion of the intelligence report people likely to partially cite. As soon as Trump was elected, the Rusbots shifted and started promoting dissent against Trump--which is also compatible with goals in the report (but not the third, redundant one).
And yet, what do you do about it? To squelch the pro-Trump agitation and anti-HRC propaganda would be to take a fine scalpel to the distinction between "those supporting the Russians and those freely supporting an electoral candidate"; we'd draw that line in a completely different place after the election, as we had to decide between "those supporting the Russians and those freely criticizing a sitting president." In other words, the actions would be political; and, necessarily, partisan.
Apart from saying, "Americans need to have confidence in each other and be wise and smart enough not to be fooled," I've got nothing. And with that, all I've got is a bad joke.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)I've gotten nothing much either
But it just seems to me more should have been done in 2 phases August-September of 2016 when there was too much at stake and just enough to lose....and then late November thru Jan when the horse was out of the barn
As an example: facebook political ads being paid in rubles. You don't have to be that smart to know you're being fooled that easily. Turns out Obama knew but only warned FB when he should've been warning everybody