9

Source: NYTimes transcript of Comey's testimoney at the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing

Source: [NYTimes transcript of Comey's testimoney at the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/us/politics/senate-hearing-transcript.html?_r=0)

13 comments

[–] Boukert 4 points (+4|-0)

No matter wich party you vote, which seat you hold in congress or whatever view you have on politics. This should alarm the fuck out of every murican!

[–] jobes 4 points (+4|-0)

It doesn't alarm me personally. I just assume that this is pretty normal on this day in age. I'd be shocked if there was an active election in this world that the US is not actively interfering in.

Comey said a lot of words, but there are no details. Did the Russians hack our voting machines? Did the Russians promote Alex Jones videos on Facebook? Did the Russians run disinformation campaigns on social media? Did Russian intelligence just do the standard thing that all other intelligence agencies in the world do in order to try and control the narrative in other counties?

Lots of dick waving and hubub.

[–] phoxy [OP] 3 points (+3|-0)

As @Boukert said the hearing is about much more than election meddling. Possible obstruction of justice by the president for example. From Comey's account it's pretty obvious that Trump is using slimy 'you scratch my back I'll scratch yours' deals to try to shut down an investigation and groom sycophants. Worryingly dictatorial and validation for why he was called Hitler before the election. Other politicians keep their slime out of sight but it doesn't mean we should give them a pass on their corruption when one gets caught.

[–] Boukert 3 points (+3|-0)

He did mention he couldnt go into details in public over a dozen times.

[–] jobes 3 points (+3|-0)

Which is why the hearing should not be the only thing US "news" should be obsessing about. It's a pony show bringing in FBI, NSA and other intelligence officers to public hearings. You get some quips here and there, but nothing of real substance can actually be discussed in pubic. It's like the TMZ of politics.

It only feeds the frenzy of the media and does nothing else. It's literally useless.

[–] phoxy [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

I wonder what methods are used. The possibilities are broad, from direct electronic voting machine vulnerabilities, malware on election officials' computers, fake news and propaganda, to indirect ways like creating confusion in swing districts.

[–] PMYA 2 points (+2|-0)

This, to me, is confirmation that there is a lot of information being withheld. The leak the other day is barely scraping the surface.

My theory is that the NSA are conducting their own attacks in retaliation, and that is why the info is all still classified. Releasing it could be harmful to ongoing operations.

[–] Boukert 4 points (+4|-0) Edited

well:

  • Releasing information would also give information about your capabilities to your enemy. Important for "what did they found out, and what not" for the attacker and such.

  • The investigations is most likely still unresolved and ongoing. This being one of the biggest things to have hit modern elections I understand they want to be thurrough rather then hastily.

  • Retaliation attacks on what to do what? rig the russian elections?

[–] PMYA 2 points (+2|-0)

The investigations might still be unresolved and ongoing

That is exactly what I mean by retaliation. The only way to truly understand what happened is to trace the attack to it's source and attack yourself. If the NSA has pinpointed exactly where the attack came from, there's no way they're going to just leave it there. They're going to start exploring.

[–] phoxy [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

The number of times Comey replied "I can't discuss this in an open session" also hints that there is a lot going on behind the scenes, from Russia meddling to Trump collusion and even Clinton. Even though he was very careful to not give away what his nonanswer was hiding.