'Weaponized' Twitter Bots Spread Info From French Campaign Hack (recode.net) 255
"The French media and public have been warned not to spread details about a hacking attack on presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron," writes Slashdot reader schwit1, with the election commission threatening criminal charges. But meanwhile, "the leaked documents have since spread like wildfire across social media, particularly on Twitter," reports Recode.
Nicole Perlroth, a cybersecurity reporter with the New York Times, pointed out that an overwhelming amount of the tweets shared about the Macron campaign hack appear to come from automated accounts, commonly referred to as bots. About 40% of the tweets using the hashtag #MacronGate, Perlroth noted, are actually coming from only 5% of accounts using the hashtag. One account tweeted 1,668 times in 24 hours, which is more than one tweet per minute with no sleep... Twitter appears not to have done anything to combat what is obviously a bot attack, despite the fact the social media company is well aware of the problem of bot accounts being used to falsely popularize political issues during high-profile campaigns to give the impression of a groundswell of grassroots support.
The Times reporter later tweeted "This could be @twitter's death knell. Algorithms exist to deal with this. Why aren't you using them?" And one Sunlight Foundation official called the discovery "statistics from the front lines of the disinformation wars," cc-ing both Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg. In other news, the BBC reports France's president has promised to "respond" to the hacking incident, giving no further details, but saying he was aware of the risks because they'd "happened elsewhere"."
The Times reporter later tweeted "This could be @twitter's death knell. Algorithms exist to deal with this. Why aren't you using them?" And one Sunlight Foundation official called the discovery "statistics from the front lines of the disinformation wars," cc-ing both Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg. In other news, the BBC reports France's president has promised to "respond" to the hacking incident, giving no further details, but saying he was aware of the risks because they'd "happened elsewhere"."
Isn't it obvious? (Score:2, Insightful)
Quite likely, some parts of the US government have in the past and probably wish to in the future used these bots themselves.
The only thing worse than Twitter not shutting them down this time would be them being found partisan.
Also, Trump uses Twitter, so the US government will probably bail them out.
Re: Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Insightful)
The bigger issues here are the overseas bank account he denied having and what's in the emails. Don't get distracted by who's releasing damning information, if the information is real the only issue is that it exists - of course corrupt people have dirt on them.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank god I'm not French or I'd have to dig through all that and decide if it's actually all legit.
While it could all be cooked up by Putin's finest, it could also be a CIA operation to de-stabilize Europe (which would be sort-of good for the US).
It could also be a Chinese thing. They smile all day and do as if they can't do wrong but I don't trust 'em. ;-)
Or it could be S.P.E.C.T.R.E. is trying to create turmoil so they can run their heist-of-the-century.
The fact is we don't really know who is behind this.
Re: Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe the time has come to stop obsessing about whether our politicians are pure as the driven snow.
I've been thinking about this for a while, and while I don't like the idea of wantonly electing crooks, it strikes me that seeing as the general populace has no lack of shady people, I can't sort out why it is exactly we expect the political class to be paragons of virtue.
In the French election, there's a choice between a center-left politician and a hard-right politician. Now neither are ideal, and neither in fact really are what one would classify as the best representatives of their particular parties, but they're the ones that have made it to the top. So rather than obsess about some rather peculiarly-timed leaks, maybe you just take them for what they are, and what they represent and go from there. If in the end, they prove to be crooked, well, either it's so severe that it drives them from office, or you use the next election to punish them.
The reality is that for anyone who is on the left, or is a progressive, or even a moderate right winger, Le Pen and the Front National are a nightmare; the party itself has a pretty dire history of being anti-Semitic and anti-European and highly xenophobic, and while Le Pen, perhaps sensing she's heading for defeat precisely because of her and her party's intemperate declarations, is now suddenly trying to portray a softer, gentler image, I simply cannot imagine even a right-minded individual who may not be a big fan of immigration thinking that electing the head of a party of virulent hate-mongers is the answer.
Frankly, French politics has a pretty long history of pretty dodgy figures, to suddenly decide that Emmanuel Macron isn't worthy of the job because of some last-minute releases of allegedly hacked files, and that a bigot like Le Pen is the one deserving of the presidency, it just boggles my mind. Even if some of the alleged leaks suggesting some dodgy tax avoidance are true, what of it? For chrissakes, what do you imagine a leak of Front National's servers would produce?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the time has come to stop obsessing about whether our politicians are pure as the driven snow.
I've been thinking about this for a while, and while I don't like the idea of wantonly electing crooks, it strikes me that seeing as the general populace has no lack of shady people, I can't sort out why it is exactly we expect the political class to be paragons of virtue.
It's an interesting question, for sure.
But the thing is: people like idols, they like to idealize their politicians - and then relish the demolition of the very same idol.
At least, here in Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
What person reaches the age of maturity and idolizes a politician? That suggests that some people never actually reach the age of maturity.
I'm pretty damned realistic about politicians. I don't expect they'll keep half their promises, in part because they don't intend to, and in part because they won't be able to. The other half are promises that I probably will end up wishing they hadn't kept. What you're really doing is electing the people that will run your government, and they will be flawed individuals
Re: Isn't it obvious? (Score:4, Insightful)
I expect different things in the age of the internet. I expect all people seeking public office to have equal access to a public information distribution system to provide details of their policies and an end to private for profit advertisements. I expect that once they throw their hats in the ring, that all party communications are to be made publicly, live in order to prevent two faced politics. I expect a record to be kept of campaign promises and should the individual be elected by held accountable for those promises unless they are able to substantiate why they were not able to fulfill them. I expect all individuals seeking public office should be tested in the exact same manner as all other government employees are subject to, publicly audited and controlled tests for intelligence, knowledge and psychological evaluation (keep in mind modern psychopathy tests can not be cheated) and the public to have access to those results.
Provide those and elections will produce much better results, done and finished.
Re: (Score:2)
He said a bunch of shit to get elected, and apparently intends to keep pretending he ever thought it was possible or even a good idea.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> Maybe the time has come to stop obsessing about whether our politicians are pure as the driven snow.
Nope. Maybe the time has come for the guilty to be brought to justice. I'm sorry an inordinate number of them happen to be on "your team".
Re: (Score:3)
> Maybe the time has come to stop obsessing about whether our politicians are pure as the driven snow.
I think you badly underestimate just how sick the general public is of this kind of hypocrisy. This idea that we can excuse any sort of corruption because they're "one of us" has been given the middle finger quite often lately, so I'm a bit surprised that people keep believing it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you badly underestimate just how sick the general public is of this kind of hypocrisy.
Yep sick of it! Hey all I've got a really good idea, if you hate hypocrisy, don't vote for the generally skeezy politician sort, vote for the REALLY sleazy, racist politician instead! That'll stick it to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately the employee is often caught and fired as you say but the boss is not. The wealthy and the powerful often seem to operate above the laws the rest of us live under.
Re: Isn't it obvious? (Score:5, Insightful)
The bigger issue is "why are so many ACs suddenly posting 'what if' scenarios?".
You positively reek of troll factory.
Re: (Score:2)
What if I told you that I was an a.c. ?
Re: (Score:2)
What if Mr T hacked the game and added a mohawk class? What if Mr T's pretty handy with computers?
Re: (Score:2)
As ever, it's 4chan and 8chan users. Head over to their /pol boards and you can see them talking about doing this stuff quite openly. Twitter bots, armies of sockpuppet accounts with French names and copy/paste French text, and of course every trick in the leaked GCHQ interference playbook such as posting speculative nonsense and seeding dissent.
I just hope that Le Pen can't win. They are determined to see Europe burn.
Re: (Score:3)
While I want to agree with what you're saying, there's a subtler phenomenon at play here: We don't have comparable information on Le Pen. For all we know she could literally be a baby killer, and that could be information that the hackers discovered, but their political bias leads them to suppress that information.
In other words, you can't accurately compare something that's known to something that's unknown. A smart player understands this, and can be selective with what they reveal in such a way that othe
Re: (Score:3)
There's no need for leaks on Le Pen or her party. The following is public information and has been available for any person able to read:
Re: (Score:2)
Fact-free news (Score:5, Interesting)
It's doubly hilarious because they're copying Hillary's losing response to this, right down to the attempts to sow doubt about the docs while admitting there are true ones in there. Or how they think that censorship is the answer, lest someone find "inaccurate" information. Best to stick to fact-free news, I guess?
Ask Donna Brazille how well that strategy works. The funniest part is that it appears that Kim Dotcom got his revenge on Hillary in the end and they can't even get him for it now without admitting the whole charade.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't think of it that way. I just thought they screwed up by releasing it so close to the blackout. But if it will shoot around like wildfire anyway, thanks to bots, then responding to it remains illegal in France.
It could be evil genius.
Re: (Score:2)
You have to be a special kind of idiot, maybe the independent voting kind of idiot, to see Hillary as corrupt and Donald Trump as not corrupt.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is information gained through a Russian hack bad, but information selectively reported by MSM perfectly fine? Both are trying to influence votes.
Re: (Score:2)
Because the Russian hackers are not accountable and often spread malicious falsehoods for political end, and French media is not as broken up as in some places? They're not really comparable...
They're already suppressing it (Score:4, Insightful)
They're already suppressing it. The various hashtags talking about this were artificially blocked from trending.
What is the next step they could take? Auto-hiding tweets talking about it? (They're already doing that.) Banning users for talking about it? Auto-removing discussion of his name?
At what point do calls for the blatant support for a single politician or suppressing support for others cross the line into political censorship and attempts at manipulating the election?
Re:They're already suppressing it (Score:5, Informative)
It could be related to the French law that makes it illegal to campaign the day before the election. Any French news outlet that discusses the leaks will be prosecuted.
It could also be related to the obvious connection between these leaks and fake news and Russian interest in supporting Le Pen.
Re: (Score:2)
Or alternately (Score:2)
And it's their service, so at no point in time does it become censorship. Censorship is when the government acts to repress speech and last I check Twitter is not an arm of any government.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That's what they want, control all media to make sure you make the "right" choice.
Re: (Score:3)
They have been reducing the impact of tweets by new accounts and obvious sock-puppets for a long time now. It's very effective because the trolls mostly use fresh accounts that are hastily created, often by bot, and are thus easy to filter. It just happens that the same anti-troll technology works well for people trying to post this stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh fuck off. By this point is there any question about it? The Russians have been mucking around with Western elections at least since Brexit. I'm glad the French are going to elect Macron, and not just because Le Pen is the leader of a den of virulent racists. Hopefully the Russians will soon find the blowback is bad that they give up on this.
In the meantime, maybe it's time to start QoSing any connections to Russia down to about 2kbps.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure it is the Russians, suddenly all hacking in the world is being done by the Russians.
Information War (Score:2)
Some Russian general wrote something equivalent [wikipedia.org] to the Project for the New American Century. It laid out a goal of destabilizing the dominant Western governments by means of hacking. It's an extremely asymmetrical type of warfare, and Putin is actually a huge fan of both the author and the techniques. The CIA and NSA have been pretty explicit about Russian influence on the elections. You are unaware or dismissive of this because you're a stupid partisan of some description and don't realize that this can ha
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think there's enough circumstantial evidence to make it pretty clear the Russians are involved. And I don't really give a fuck whether you accept that or not. The fact that they're not even making a secret of Le Pen being their preferred candidate is enough evidence for me.
Re: (Score:2)
It's MightyMartian. He doesn't think. He will not and cannot point to a single shred of evidence simply because none exists.
Re: (Score:3)
Of course there isn't. Putin actively protects his hackers on Russian soil which means that it's impossible to point to "proof". That doesn't mean that the less dense among us don't see Putin's actions and despise him for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Show some evidence. Please. We're waiting. You can't and won't.
Re: (Score:2)
We'll get back to you as soon as the Russian judicial system is no longer a joke. Don't forget to bug your buddy Putin regularly on how he's progressing.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure Vlad, whatever you say...
Re: (Score:2)
C'est toi l'expert dans la domaine...
Censorship (Score:3, Insightful)
"Why aren't you suppressing information in order to allow our pre-selected candidate to breeze through to a state-approved victory!!!???"
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing they didn't weaponize MySpace (Score:3)
Anything worth leaking? (Score:3)
Re:Anything worth leaking? (Score:5, Informative)
Nah, it's just internal campaign emails of little importance that the leakers mixed in with transparently forged documents about foreign bank accounts. I have friends who'll be voting FN & even among them nobody believes that the bank account dumps are true. Putin's overuse of the same tactics are wearing thin.
Re: (Score:2)
Putin's tactics are now well known and have become counterproductive: Nobody believed the lies
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, Putin's playbook is now universally recognised and only anonymous _Cowards_ attempt to defend him.
Clouseau (Score:2)
I suspect...everyone.
Apathetic Americans (Score:5, Insightful)
let the Russians totally pwn their electoral process with impunity. Putin has made you folks a laughing stock. Just sayin.
Tomorrow I expect the French people will give a big fuck you to Czar Vladimir
Re: (Score:2)
It does appear that way. Le Pen is way behind, and it's difficult to imagine her catching up. This time, at least, it appears to have failed.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So Le Pen also has a 1% chance to win?
I think we all know what happens next.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably a lot closer to zero than to one.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem wan't the electoral college, it was that the candidate was Hillary. Fortunately, Macron isn't Hillary.
Re: (Score:2)
Hillary got more votes. Trump only won because of the college.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump won according to the rules, everything else is pissant whining.
Getting more votes isn't how you win the presidential election in the U.S., winning the electoral college is.
If the Dems thought is was a problem they could have done something about it, like when _Hillary's_husband_ was POTUS. They didn't and losers don't get to change the rules because whine, whine, whine.
Re: (Score:2)
Hillary got more votes. Trump only won because of the college.
There's a meme picture floating around where a chess king is cornered in checkmate. Suddenly it opens up with Hillary's voice, "If you look at the board, you will see I actually have more pieces, so I really won."
I understand your claim, but it is very bitter to keep repeating it. I'm sure Brian Griffin will repeat it for the next 8 years, like he did with the 2000 election.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Marine could score 49.9999% & that still wouldn't give the FN a single Député. The FN will have to do muuuuch better in the parlementary elections in June than they have ever done and except for Dupont-Aingan nobody will ally themselves with the FN and though they may score higher than the currently fragmented political parties in France the FN is rarely over 50% they'll need when everyone else unites against them.
Re: (Score:2)
If there's apathy about Russian interference, I think it's a realization that there's unlikely to be much of a change. We'll still have the dumbasses who voted for him, we'll still have the GOP.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious how you believe that to be true?
Did the Russians hack the voting machines themselves? Afaik, there hasn't been a whisper of that from either side.
Did they sneakily install and run the email server from Ms Clinton's home for years without her knowledge?
Did they poison her food, giving her muscular tremors and looking like a debilitated invalid trying to hide it from the public?
Did they prevent her campaign from being able to spend any time or resources in Michigan or Wisconsin?
Did they manipulat
Re:Apathetic Americans (Score:4, Insightful)
That Clinton was the worst candidate in decades doesn't disprove Putin's meddling. Both helped get Trump elected.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point it's not about making excuses for Clinton or the Democrats. We're not talking about them anymore, instead we're talking about Germany, we're talking about France, we're talking about what happens next time. If you think that these guys are going to help you again next time, you're on crack, because they're not on your side. They're on their own side, and if the next time around it's a left-wing candidate that says "I think we should (do what Russia wants)" then guess what?
Remember
I wanna get in here before the (Score:2)
If you really want everything done out in the
Re:I wanna get in here before the (Score:4, Insightful)
Translated: "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
There's certainly something to be said about the truth coming out. What we're seeing lately is not that, however. It's deliberate, one-sided, theft and carefully timed release of one side's information for specific political advantage. The concept isn't new, either - it was tried before and wound up becoming a scandal called Watergate.
What's different now is that the internet makes it so much easier to do, both because everyone uses it for communication and coordination on pretty much everything, but you don't need to even be close by to steal it, either. And even when you get caught red handed because all the digital evidence points right back to Russia, you've still got tons of useful idiots who'll throw up their hands and claim "it could be anyone else, we can never know, false flag, etc etc", never-mind the bots and sock puppets you can make to do the same.
EU flag (Score:2, Troll)
Dear Slashdot,
Could you please have an icon other than the EU flag for France related news? Especially to cover a national election where some voters/candidates reject EU.
Unefficient (Score:2)
That psyop [wikipedia.org] will not save France from Macron's presidency, unfortunately. Most of his vote will come from its own opponents that feat Le Pen even more than him.
That odd situation happens because only 34% of citizen did cast a vote for Macron or Le Pen during election's first round.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, election system could be even worse.
Another issue at work is that despite his low score on first round, Macron said he would consider votes for him on second round as support for his project, which include a blitz krieg against labor laws. That drives many poor workers toward Le Pen.
Recoverable (Score:2)
France can recover from Macron's missteps. Le Pen would be the end of liberté, égalité, and fraternité. I just don't think the French are willing to give up the France no matter how many sock-puppets Putin deploys.
Whoo hoo! (Score:2)
The Times reporter later tweeted "This could be @twitter's death knell.
homersimpson.jpg
All that censorship and information... (Score:3, Insightful)
...control is great. But what's in the hacked information? Its pretty clear what media including slashdot is doing here. Attempting to destroy the messenger while ignoring the message. Hackers are the new journalists.
Re: All that censorship and information... (Score:2)
Russians like to control the media. Just like you.
Twitter and Facebook in blatant censorship effort (Score:2)
The "bots" seems to be an excuse for Facebook and Twitter to target a number of high-visibility anti-Macron accounts. I have witnessed that myself, as one of my accounts was flagged as "bot" after I retweeted something about the #MacronLeaks. But for about three days, I had seen signs of accounts being targeted, and they were all anti-Macron accounts (I followed both sides and had probably about as many subscriptions in one camp and in the other). Hate from the pro-Macron account (of which I witnessed a lot
Re:Who gains the most from dividing the EU? (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone from, and living in, the EU. I'm worried much more about Russia than the US.
To be honest though, I'm not really worried about either, but if I had to pick...
Re: (Score:2)
You need to read more. You are talking absolute bollocks. I thought Americans were supposed to be brave - why are there so many pussies over there?
Re:Who gains the most from dividing the EU? (Score:4, Insightful)
The U.S. does. The EU is a big wall around the most lucrative market in the world, and there's no walking in and taking it as long as the walls are up. And of course it's very convenient to blame anything that happens on the Russians. Those evil Russians, who can hack into everything with a breeze just like in the movies, but at the same time are so bumbling and hilariously clumsy that they always leave a trove of clearly incriminating evidence behind. If you believe the U.S. outlets, that is.
The US made the EU in order to reduce the chance of them going to war with each other again. The US wanted an United States of Europe model to look at in the mirror. Dividing Europe again would be counter-productive to US policy.
No, Europe is undo-ing the EU all by themselves and it's just that the US isn't stopping them (not that we are trying as we have seemed to caught the nationalistic bug ourselves). Maybe you favor some sort of intervention policy? Sorry, that's not in the cards...
As to if Russia is behind the nationalistic bug that's going around? Don't know. But I suspect it has been festering for quite a while and this whole Syria event has some how created a snowball effect of this pent-up nationalistic energy. History has a way of working that way (see WWI as an example).
You can blame Russia for Syria, or maybe you can even blame the US for creating ISIL that triggered the situation in Syria. That might be fair, but as to some US conspiracy to break up the EU, hardly. The US isn't that smart about things. If the US proves to be ultimately responsible for the breakup of the EU, it was some unforeseen consequence of our intervention in Afghanistan against the Soviet invasion of that country back in the '80s in a misguided attempt to regain some national pride after losing Vietnam, not some multi-national corporate conspiracy...
Re:Who gains the most from dividing the EU? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think this is because the "elite" fell asleep in their comfortable places and forgot the people.
For me and my country, the EU is great, but I can see how that may be annoying to the people in richer countries.
Another problem is the refugees. Now, I do not think that they all should be shot for illegally crossing the border etc, however, I remember Germany inviting them to come (instead of reluctantly accepting them) causing more refugees to come. It turned out that Germany cannot handle them all, so it forced other countries to accept them. This highlighted a few problems:
1. Germany has too much control in what is supposed to be a union, as opposed to the other countries being colonies of Germany. Kinda like the USSR where Moscow had all the power (though EU is not communist and is not so obsessed with military as the USSR was). It may not matter to my country - as we would have to obey someone anyway - be it Russia, Germany, the US or some other powerful country. But, I can understand why the people of the UK or France may not like that.
2. The EU has essentially no external border security. Before my country joined the EU, there was doubt on whether it should be accepted because it may have leaky external borders (with Belarus etc). It turns out all external EU borders are leaky. It may be OK if everyone who is coming is not a criminal, but if I was in control of ISIS I would send quite a few members disguised as refugees.
There also has been too much looking out for the interests of banks and big corporations over the interests of the people and small businesses.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee whiz, someone doesn't like being called a Nazi when they're not Nazi's. What a fucking amazing revelation! To top it off, being smeared as a Nazi makes you a valid target for political violence. I, for one, can't believe that anyone would mind being called a Nazi by a bunch of commies. Shocking, just scandalous.
Re: (Score:2)
This (calling everybody you disagree with Nazi) may also soften the people's opinion about the real Nazis.
What I mean, there are not a lot of people remaining who remember living under the Nazis, most of the people know about them from history books etc. So, to somebody not really into history, getting called a Nazi for his beliefs may result in that person thinking "well, what I want (more equal pay between workers and business owners, reduction of the influence of large corporations, preserving our cultur
Re: (Score:2)
As to if Russia is behind the nationalistic bug that's going around? Don't know.
Then you haven't been paying attention. Russia has been running a (quite effective) cyber campaign since at least 2005. Our European allies have been warning us about it for years. But typical US arrogance brushed it off: "Yeah, like that would ever work here!".
Propaganda works. All you need is a willing populace and the right mix sentiment and plausible (not necessarily factual or true) information and you have people by the balls. Backfire and Duning-Kruger are strong psychological phenomena, and it can b
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Who gains the most from dividing the EU?
People from EU nations would gain by weakening the EU bureaucracy that enforces austerity on them.
Re: (Score:3)
Who gains the most from dividing the EU?
People from EU nations would gain by weakening the EU bureaucracy that enforces austerity on them.
So people in alternative reality?
No austerity is forced on anyone by the EU. Some is forced on themselves because they not only ran out of money but ran out of money to loan, and some nice EU countries offered to loan them even more in return for them stop spending over their limit, but that is not by the EU, that is by the charitable individual countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Western EU countries like France or Germany get loan with negative interests. Austerity makes no sense here.
Germany does occationally, but not constantly, and I don't think France does at all. But you have to realise they are only negative because the government bonds are in low supply and high demand, if Germany issued more government bonds the price would drop rapidly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ahh, the old 'what if', eh? Sure, let's try that.
What if your troll factory stopped paying you to spread AC misinformation? Go back to your Russian hell.
Re: (Score:2)
Then he's still a better choice than LePen anyway.
Re: What if ... (Score:2)
Do you believe people have the right to chose their leaders or not? It would seem not.
Re: (Score:3)
It's already been certified by both the Macron camp and Wikileaks to be accurate, it wasn't originally published by Wikileaks and the first parts only had some "regular business", Macron had to admit/deny before the media blackout and admitted "yeah, our email got hacked". Only after they published the evidence of tax evasion did Macron walk the admission back.
Re: (Score:3)
It's already been certified by both the Macron camp and Wikileaks to be accurate
My understanding is that the Macron camp have confirmed that a hack occurred. That's not the same as confirming the accuracy of the released materials.
does not matter (Score:2)
This isn't "free speech" (Score:2, Insightful)
This is clearly an attack timed and aimed to influence the outcome of an election that could have massive implications for France, Europe, and the world. Don't try to paint it otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you have to hide, politician? Papers please, candidate. Assume the position, bureaucrat.
The only difference is citizens have an actual need, and in most cases an explicit right, to know what their government and its officials are doing.
I notice how you make no effort to deny the claims, you just bitch about the fact that info got out. Let me guess - you're with "her".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anything political parties do is either corrupt or can be painted as such. The details tend not to be important. Arrest whomever you like but then we have a more general hacking issue to attend to.
Re:"Bot attack" (Score:4, Interesting)
It's awful curious how there are no major leaks against right wing candidates who are friendly with the Russians.
As it is, it's no secret that Le Pen and Moscow are on very friendly terms. This is getting to be a familiar tune. Political candidate has close ties to Russia, opponent suddenly faces major email hack and release of lots of allegedly damning documents.
Re: (Score:2)
So where are the documents?
Re:Pro-Macron folks sure protest a lot. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's only one piece of information that matters about Le Pen: She and her party are fucking neo-nazis.