3 ms·

John McAfee on Russian Hack of DNC

pfarnsworth 10y ago
Does this guy have any credibility left? Why do we care what he says, to me it's akin to a random person on the street espousing ramblings.
eugeniub 10y ago
This is the same man who admitted to lying about the Apple FBI dispute earlier this year to "get a shitload of public attention" (http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/john-mcafee-lied-iphone-apple-fbi/ http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/john-mcafee-lied-iphone-apple...). I'm not interested in hearing anything more from this chronic attention seeker.
- SallySwanSmith 10y ago
  ^This
- disposablezero 10y ago
  Here, here. JM has long since jumped the shark. Don't worry though, Herr Trumpf will hire him.
headcanon 10y ago
Here we go again: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-mcafee-i-know-who-hacked-sony-pictures-it-wasnt-north-korea-1483581 http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-mcafee-i-know-who-hacked-sony-... Every time some "mysterious" hacking scheme comes out, John McAfee has a formula: "I know who did it, it wasn't $BADGUY"
hourislate 10y ago
Didn't some Russian politician already admit that they tried to help Trump and what's the big deal? Didn't Putin even hint at it in some way during the run up to the election? I mean what do people want a statement from the Kremlin that they tried to help Trump? I thought Americans knew that Russia has invested billions in Trumps real estate businesses, hence the close relationship with Putin and the fact that Trump will never release his tax returns. http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/19/the-curious-world-of-donald-trumps-private-russian-connections/ http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/19/the-curious-... http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/302216-how-much-money-does-the-trump-organization-owe http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/...
frodoBro 10y ago
Admittedly, a generalized diagram from a press release is not direct evidence. A diagram only serves to clarify a concept in terms clearer than a passage of text. It's true that any actor in an espionage/sabotage operation will attempt to obscure their hand in the matter, and obvious evidence should be treated with suspicion. One might be tempted to conclude that the anticipation of evidence among actors renders actual evidence collection futile. Unfortunately, John McAfee's hypothesis is not backed by evidence at all. It's just his gut instinct. I wonder if John McAfee's methodology of inverting evidence, by way of evidence tampering/obscuring motives, holds up against other scenarios. Stuxnet, or Snowden leaks for example. Sure, all *THOSE* things *LOOK* like they originate from the NSA, but that what you're *SUPPOSED* to think, mannn!
ubersoldat2k7 10y ago
What I don't understand is, ignoring whoever did the hack, for whatever reason, the election was compromised. Why isn't congress or supreme Court asking for a new election if this one was a fraud?
- ddw 10y ago
  Because they are Republican-dominated and their guy won
- alphabettsy 10y ago
  How was the election "compromised"? The DNC was compromised which is not a part of the government at all. It's the organizing body of a political party. Not only that but they only provided stolen information for the public and media to use or misuse.

Does this guy have any credibility left? Why do we care what he says, to me it's akin to a random person on the street espousing ramblings.

eugeniub 10y ago

This is the same man who admitted to lying about the Apple FBI dispute earlier this year to "get a shitload of public attention" (http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/john-mcafee-lied-iphone-apple-fbi/ http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/john-mcafee-lied-iphone-apple...). I'm not interested in hearing anything more from this chronic attention seeker.

SallySwanSmith 10y ago
^This
disposablezero 10y ago
Here, here. JM has long since jumped the shark. Don't worry though, Herr Trumpf will hire him.

headcanon 10y ago

Here we go again: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-mcafee-i-know-who-hacked-sony-pictures-it-wasnt-north-korea-1483581 http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-mcafee-i-know-who-hacked-sony-... Every time some "mysterious" hacking scheme comes out, John McAfee has a formula: "I know who did it, it wasn't $BADGUY"

hourislate 10y ago

Didn't some Russian politician already admit that they tried to help Trump and what's the big deal? Didn't Putin even hint at it in some way during the run up to the election? I mean what do people want a statement from the Kremlin that they tried to help Trump? I thought Americans knew that Russia has invested billions in Trumps real estate businesses, hence the close relationship with Putin and the fact that Trump will never release his tax returns. http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/19/the-curious-world-of-donald-trumps-private-russian-connections/ http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/19/the-curious-... http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/302216-how-much-money-does-the-trump-organization-owe http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/...

frodoBro 10y ago

Admittedly, a generalized diagram from a press release is not direct evidence. A diagram only serves to clarify a concept in terms clearer than a passage of text. It's true that any actor in an espionage/sabotage operation will attempt to obscure their hand in the matter, and obvious evidence should be treated with suspicion. One might be tempted to conclude that the anticipation of evidence among actors renders actual evidence collection futile. Unfortunately, John McAfee's hypothesis is not backed by evidence at all. It's just his gut instinct. I wonder if John McAfee's methodology of inverting evidence, by way of evidence tampering/obscuring motives, holds up against other scenarios. Stuxnet, or Snowden leaks for example. Sure, all *THOSE* things *LOOK* like they originate from the NSA, but that what you're *SUPPOSED* to think, mannn!

ubersoldat2k7 10y ago

What I don't understand is, ignoring whoever did the hack, for whatever reason, the election was compromised. Why isn't congress or supreme Court asking for a new election if this one was a fraud?

ddw 10y ago
Because they are Republican-dominated and their guy won
alphabettsy 10y ago
How was the election "compromised"? The DNC was compromised which is not a part of the government at all. It's the organizing body of a political party. Not only that but they only provided stolen information for the public and media to use or misuse.