Some thoughts on Anon and hacking and all that (as well as the culture)

[DirkGently]

2. The Anon hates "officer friendly" argument has no legs.

Anonymous and Wikileaks don't need the authorities to put proof out there. Plenty of journalists would leap at any plausible evidence of vote tampering. And in the past, that's exactly what they've done.

It was quite simple, for example, for Anon to post the HBGary e-mails online. No need to sit down with the Powers That Be and convince them of anything. Post it online, hand it to the press. Done. No need to jump through a single legal hoop or trust a single seat of power.

That's the beauty, and the power, of hacking and leaking to expose. Simply weaving a story, with zero backing, would be an unprecedented way for anyone who had uncovered something so big to behave.

So the argument that these super-competent hackers would rely on a totally unsupported internet video to reveal the results of the biggest hactivism story in history is 100% bullshit.

Of course it's possible, AND tantalizing, that something actually happened here, because it would confirm all sorts of things people suspect of Rove, and because he DID look like his remote wasn't working when he flipped out on Fox.

A simpler explanation would be that Rove, who in addition to being slimy, fancies himself the keeper of "the math," was wrong, again.

I'll await further developments with everyone else convinced that Rove is an unindicted co-conspirator. But we just look silly when we start talking in the pseudo-religious terms of the right, which requires no facts to draw its conclusions. Remember, the NRA made the "no evidence is evidence" argument regarding Obama and gun control. "The fact he didn't do it ... just proves he's going to do it?"

We're smarter than that.