I didn't watch the video. I accidentally up voted using a stupid jacked up iPad I never use. My bad

So, to save you wasting 22 minutes watching this dreck, this is all a semantic argument about how you define "attack".

If you say illicitly intruding on a system and stealing the data, and probing the system to prepare for future intrusions is just "scanning" and to be an "attack" they must successfully, detectably use that stolen data to take over/directly influence the system (like deleting or invalidating voters or freezing/ransomwareing the election computer systems) or to successfully change the results inside election machines, then there was no successful attack detected.
If you think breaking into election systems, stealing the data, and scanning the election system for exploitable vulnerabilities is an attack, there were many attacks detected.

Jebus Christ, this is what Jimmy Dore has become, a ranting conspiracy theorist that gleefully twists any fact to match his narrative? How sad.

Remind you of anyone?

I also love how weighted this argument is. Finding the ONE person of an ethnic/political/social etc... view point that contradicts the norm but completely disregards the extreme majority because it doesn't fit their narrative.

I'm sure if you look hard enough bob you can fine a "scientist" who thinks cigarettes are just great too.

Go sit in the corner until the bell rings and think about what you've done.

Then you wonder how Trump got elected.

*walks away shaking head*

"when you characterize these things as attacks I think that that is perhaps overstating what may have happened in the 21 states...the majority of the activity was simple scanning....scanning is a regular activity across the web."

Gee I wonder how Jimmy is twisting those words into a "semantic" argument. It's literally what the Homeland Security guy being questioned is saying, he's not twisting anything!

As I said, it's a semantic argument about what you call an attack. Most people call intruding on a secure government system, testing security, and stealing data an attack, obviously they, and you, don't. You're entitled to that opinion, I'm entitled to disagree if I so choose.

Yes, it's normal across the web to have a pubic website's security tested by potential attackers by scanning the system before launching an attack.

What's not such regular activity is someone successfully breaking into secure government election systems using among other methods Trojan horse emails known to have been designed by hostile foreign powers, which was one detail I recall from 2016.

That's the kind of foreign policy we only like to export from America, not import, cause Merica first!

Moving this video to bobknight33's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.