17 US intelligence agencies confirm the Russian hacked the Dems. Are they the same agencies that confirmed Weapons of Mass Destruc. in Iraq?

Capt (Join to see) - True, but ODNI is not an Agency. It is the management office for the community.

SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint - Thanks for the clarification, sir.

SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint - Although it's almost as large as an agency now, it publishes its own 'intel reports' now, and it acts more like an agency than a management office for the community.

Mission creep. When they took the Presidential Daily Brief away from Director CIA, that was getting more operational, but it was a power play because organizations were not listening to ODNI.

SGT Dave Tracy - You think the Russians are so bad that they would get caught and noticed? Good hackers do not get hacked. I think the RU is good.

SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint - Occam's razor: The explanation with the fewest assumptions is likely the correct one. Folks, is it really easier to believe that multiple intelligence agencies AND experts across the cyber security industry are all in cahoots or all equally incompetent as to to lay the blame on persecuted Russians? Really, THAT is easier to believe than to believe Russia was actually behind it?! C'mon.

Russia has the means, motive and opportunity to do the hack, but nothing is perfect; not even the covering one's tracks. But for fun--and in possible violation of Occam's Razor--if we want to play games of conjecture, then let me ask this: Why presume that Russia would NOT want suspicion to fall on them? Sounds counter-intuitive, but let me flesh out the thought: Even the accusation itself plays right into Putin's "America's out to get me" line of reasoning which plays very well on the home front; and to be sure, he has been playing it up at home. There is little to no downside for Russia to do this hack and expose the dirty laundry of the DNC today...could be the RNC tomorrow if the winds of Russian fortune change direction in the future. For former KGB agent President Vladimir Putin, it's winner, winner chicken dinner all day long.

Hackers, even the best, do leave digital footprints; clues that lead to who and how. Difficultly in finding these clues though--or in some cases that a hack occurred at all--may vary, but they exist. Intelligence agencies and the private cyber-security industry deal with this daily; and you can go online and see where most industry (i.e. not government) opinion rests in this hacking case. Can the clues be deceptive, thus the conclusions inaccurate? I don't see why not, but is that really most likely the case?

I understand not wanting to accept at face value anything any one person claims, particularly if it dribbles from the mouth of a politician or entrenched governmental bureaucrat, but you have got to weigh the argument and the amount of evidence for it. Sometimes politicians and government officials DO tell the truth even if it's often for their own ends. Still, except for many biased members of the mass media, who did the hack doesn't (or shouldn't) detract from some of the shady information revealed in the data from the DNC hack. It seems that for some people, the idea of admitting it's probably not incompetence or a conspiracy to blame Russia for the hack somehow weakens the argument against the Democrats based on what was in the hack. It doesn't. Russia most likely did the hack, but I've yet to hear anyone claiming what they reveled are lies.

If one ethically objects to using the fruit from the poisoned tree against Democrats, fine. I can respect standing on that principle. If one wants to take the info from the hack to show the world what is really going on behind the DNC's closed doors, fine as well. I can respect the push for transparency and truth-but don't forget what goes around has a nasty habit of coming around. What to do with the knowledge is a whole different debate than understanding and acknowledging who almost certainly did the hack based on the strength of opinions from multiple people and organizations both inside and outside of our government. Knowing who did it, how it was done, the motives behind why it was done and how to guard against it in the future are extremely important...to everybody.

Nation states hacking is at a much higher level of quality. My guess if you screwed up working for Putin, he is not going to give you a Legion of Merit. He might give metal....but not an award for screwing up a hack. That is a level people do not want to screw up.

I'm going to take the professional assessment of the retired Director of G2/Intelligence, US Army Communications Electronic Command on this one, gentlemen.