
John McAfee on Russian Hack of DNC - 69mlgsniperdad
http://ibankcoin.com/flyblog/2016/12/30/john-mcafee-i-can-guarantee-you-it-was-not-the-russians/
======
eugeniub
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...](http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/john-mcafee-lied-iphone-apple-fbi/)).
I'm not interested in hearing anything more from this chronic attention
seeker.

~~~
disposablezero
Here, here. JM has long since jumped the shark. Don't worry though, Herr
Trumpf will hire him.

------
pfarnsworth
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.

------
hourislate
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-...](http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/12/19/the-curious-
world-of-donald-trumps-private-russian-connections/)

[http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-
campaign/...](http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-
campaign/302216-how-much-money-does-the-trump-organization-owe)

------
frodoBro
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!

------
headcanon
Here we go again:

[http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-mcafee-i-know-who-hacked-
sony-...](http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-mcafee-i-know-who-hacked-sony-
pictures-it-wasnt-north-korea-1483581)

Every time some "mysterious" hacking scheme comes out, John McAfee has a
formula: "I know who did it, it wasn't $BADGUY"

------
ubersoldat2k7
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?

~~~
alphabettsy
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.

