0
billvon

Russia swayed US election

Recommended Posts

My short reaction to this -

1 - nothing that was 'leaked' or a 'surprise' news or announcement was anything earth shattering. I believe worse about both candidates than any surprise info. In otherwords, the info was 'meh'.

2 - I trust the voters to vote as they will.

I'd be more worried about the ability to vote tamper. That's more scary than the voters actually voting with bad data. They already vote with bad data.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

My short reaction to this -

1 - nothing that was 'leaked' or a 'surprise' news or announcement was anything earth shattering. I believe worse about both candidates than any surprise info. In otherwords, the info was 'meh'.

2 - I trust the voters to vote as they will.

I'd be more worried about the ability to vote tamper. That's more scary than the voters actually voting with bad data. They already vote with bad data.



Vote tampering is part of this to some degree.

If you convince the public that your democracy can be controlled and that your press is always lying to you, it becomes much easier to force the country in a different direction.
This play book is as old as time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

They already vote with bad data.



This is more to the point. We all choose which info to pay attention to and which to ignore. No one voted Trump because of the slow trickle of D emails leaked out. None of them mattered. The election was won on emotion, not data.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

So Russia was able to hack both parties' servers and get a lot of crap that both sides wanted to hide from the world.

Then they released more of the DNC crap that the DNC was hiding from us, than the RNC crap that the RNC was hiding from us.

ok.....fine. I'd rather have all of it. From both sides.

so we get some of the truth but not all of it.

still better than the lies and distortions and strawmen that both DNC and RNC were deliberately trying to feed us....

But the big complaint wasn't that there was a lot of info being hid. It's that the release of it wasn't even handed?


1 - It would be neat to see all the info being hidden from both teams. We'd never get that.
2 - I'd prefer that Russia stay out of it.
3 - Internet security sucks. I hope the CIA and the military (etc) have better security than our political orgs. Frankly I don't care about those guys - I hope my BANK and e-mail and Amazon has better.



It is my understanding that Reince Pribus had the following to say and then some on ABC News "This Week"

""We contacted the FBI months ago when the [alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee] issue came about. They reviewed all of our systems. We have hacking-detection systems in place, and the conclusion was then, as it was again two days ago when we went back to the FBI to ask them about this, that the RNC was not hacked"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"We contacted the FBI months ago when the [alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee] issue came about. They reviewed all of our systems. We have hacking-detection systems in place, and the conclusion was then, as it was again two days ago when we went back to the FBI to ask them about this, that the RNC was not hacked."

Hmm. Given that the CIA has discovered evidence to the contrary, looks like a special investigation is in order. Why was Priebus lying? What else is he lying about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen

Hi rehmwa,

Quote

I trust the voters to vote as they will.



Can I take that as a 'you would like to get rid of the electoral college?'

Jerry Baumchen



no - we vote, and the state uses those votes to assign electoral votes. I have no issue with this system really. Even if I sometimes don't like the results. The only thing I'm against is changing the rules mid-campaign or after the fact.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

Vote tampering is part of this to some degree.

If you convince the public that your democracy can be controlled and that your press is always lying to you, it becomes much easier to force the country in a different direction.
This play book is as old as time.



3 things and I'll rank them according to my opinion here:

1 - Vote Tampering - actually altering the ballet box and changing an existing vote to something it isn't - either immediately, electronically, during recount reviews, etc etc

2 - Voter Fraud - non-citizen voting, multiple voting, deceased voting, etc

3 - Voter Influence - releasing targetted e-mails, campaigning, false and true news, October surprises, etc etc etc


From what I can tell, the Russia accusation is influencing, not tampering. As far as unfluencing, I prefer to get my one-sided, ridiculously biased, and twisted information from the approved sources: the media and the campaigns and my friends :ph34r:. Not some country or organization that might not have at least the intent of the best interests of my country.


But seriously, the vote was so sharply and inevitably divided, I don't know anything that could have been leaked that would have swayed anybody either way. Including video of EITHER candidate slowly torturing a kitten and bathing in their blood - no matter how good it is for Hillary's skin.

If the Russian's really did attempt something, then I truly laugh at them for an epic waste of effort and resources. They truly do not understand the political obstinacy of the population at all. I recommend Putin spend some time here in Speaker's Corner. then he'd understand the collossal waste of time his group went through.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

"We contacted the FBI months ago when the [alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee] issue came about. They reviewed all of our systems. We have hacking-detection systems in place, and the conclusion was then, as it was again two days ago when we went back to the FBI to ask them about this, that the RNC was not hacked."

Hmm. Given that the CIA has discovered evidence to the contrary, looks like a special investigation is in order. Why was Priebus lying? What else is he lying about?



Damn country...we have the CIA colluding with the DNC and the FBI with the RNC. Well I guess you still have the Main Stream Media working with the DNC to get to the Truth:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

.......I recommend Putin spend some time here in Speaker's Corner. then he'd understand the collossal waste of time his group went through.



I'd look forward to it. I've learned some pretty spiffy insults on here that I'd like to try out some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's what I don't understand. The accusation is that Russia got hold of emails that proved that Clinton and the DNC did things that we voters didn't like and leaked it to wikileaks.
One of the few people who would actually know this would be Julian Assange. But since making the statement that they didn't get the info from Russia Assange went from being the beloved spokesperson for The Left to being a nobody. Seriously, how many people here have even seen a news report about how Assange denies that it came from the Russian government? Why is that statement not news? And why would Assange lie for Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>But since making the statement that they didn't get the info from Russia Assange
>went from being the beloved spokesperson for The Left . . .

The guy that Obama has been trying to arrest for years is "the beloved spokesperson for the left?" The guy who said he had "accumulated a lot of material about Hillary Clinton, which could proceed to an indictment?" That guy?

Interesting spin.

Up next - why has no one heard from Sarah Palin in a while, the other beloved spokesperson for the left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assage, WikiLeaks, they've influenced the election.

No wait, let's have a recount, those crafty Russian bastards hacked the voting machines.

Ok, maybe they didn't hack the voting machines, but those pesky Russians hacked the RNC and DNC. So crafty they picked sides against Hillary, although according to many media outlets, Trump tried to grab her by the pussy in retaliation......

For the side whining about Trump accepting the results of the election, this stuff is laughable. Mainly because they got their ass kicked and still can't figure out how the coronation failed.

And the left wonders how they keep losing more ground.

The RNC chairman openly stated there was no hack, he would not say that without knowing the truth.

The political class is nervous, including Lindsay Graham and John McCain, and for good reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nQ7L3_lYC8

There's not much ambiguity in the RNC response to this.
Compare that to what the definition of "is" is.......

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gowlerk

Quote

They already vote with bad data.



This is more to the point. We all choose which info to pay attention to and which to ignore. No one voted Trump because of the slow trickle of D emails leaked out. None of them mattered. The election was won on emotion, not data.


As I accurately predicted back in July. ;)

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4808667;search_string=emotion;#4808667
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skycop

What I'm saying is, they are not answering in political double speak.
That in itself speaks volumes.



The nuances of double speak, spin and lying. Have become one and the same for me.

I firmly believe the Putin government tried to influence the election. But i don't think they had any real influence on the outcome. IMO investigations may conclude Hillary was targeted because of her strong anti-Russian attitude.

Europe, NATO, James N. Mattis, Senator McCain, the Senate and the House. Will educate trump with regards to Russian interests. How they differ from that of the US interests.About Russian cyber attacks on the Baltic states, Ukraine, Georgia and others.

trump approaches international politics in a realpolitik way("is politics or diplomacy based primarily on considerations of given circumstances and factors, rather than explicit ideological notions or moral and ethical premises"). He views international trade the same way. Come 2017 such a lack of ideological center will tax his ability to manage and govern.

Perhaps trump envisions this version of himself:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/books/review/putins-kleptocracy-by-karen-dawisha.html?_r=0

and since he feels waterboarding is necessary, a darker version:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38294204

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyBoyd

*********He only hopes he is right......



Was there another time when a foreign country interfered with our election? I really don't know. Can you point out another time when this happened? I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, just asking.

None that I know of.

My point had nothing to with the past howerver. My point is the left is in so much denial over the election. Russian interference (if there really was any) would just help them continue to try and de-legitimize a Trump presidency.

You know there has to be some other reason than Hillary jost lost to a.better candidate. No.way. Cause any thinking person would not vote.for Trump normally. So it had to be the Russuians!

This appears to be all political to me at this piont anyway.

The presidential election is about politics? Who knew? ;)

Look, I'm a progressive liberal, and I'm not in denial about anything. Trump won. From my point of view, that sucks, but there's nothing to do but move forward. I think the Ruskies probably did throw a bit of a monkey wrench into things, but we've done this lots of times to other countries. And crying about it won't help. The Dem's just need to find a better candidate next time.

The more I thought about your post and the more I read the more I agreed with you. The US and the Russians have been messing with each other for decades.

I now think, even more, that this is a fake news story with only one intent, diminish Trump as the details do not support the claim that the Russians helped Trump.

Now this,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E?il=0

It is looking like you were spot on.


To the rest of you here.

Give it a break.

Clinton lost because she was a poorer candidate.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To the crybaby sore losers.

This opinion article is on the money!!!

By Liz Peek
·Published December 12, 2016
· FoxNews.com


















Now Playing
Trump blasts claim Russia hacked the election




Make no mistake: it’s payback time. In ordering up a “deep dive” into possible Russian interference in the election of Donald Trump, sore loser Barack Obama wants to delegitimize the real estate magnate’s win. His motive? Punishing Trump for the years the mogul spent publicly questioning whether Obama was an American citizen, which cast doubts on the legitimacy of his presidency. Ah, how sweet the revenge. And how pitiful.

President Obama has searched high and, increasingly, low, for the reasons he and Hillary Clinton lost the election. He has blamed Fox News, insufficient grass-roots campaigning by Hillary, “fake news”, and now has singled out Russian meddling for the loss of 194 of 207 counties that voted for him in either 2008 or 2012.

The suggestion is that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; the liberal media has hinted darkly that the president-elect and his campaign team have “ties” to the Russian head of state.

As most Americans review Trump’s defense and security picks, the notion that the new administration will go easy on our adversaries – including Russia – is laughable. Retired General James Mattis, whom Trump has nominated to head Defense, has described Russia’s annexation of Crimea as a “severe” threat, one underestimated by the Obama White House. Mattis is not to be trifled with.

The media has ignored the reality that Moscow’s possible hacking of DNC and Podesta’s emails were retaliation for Hillary Clinton’s assertions that Russian elections in 2011 were “rigged” – an accusation that infuriated Putin. When protests erupted in Russia over the election outcome, Putin blamed Clinton. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,” Putin said at the time. He accused then Secretary of State Clinton for giving “a signal” to demonstrators organized “with the support of the U.S. State Department…We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,” Putin said. Does this sound familiar? Turnabout is fair play, and Putin has made it clear that if we mess with his elections, he will mess with ours.

Obama knows this. Politico reported in a July piece entitled “Why Putin Hates Hillary” that the Russian leader’s anger about Clinton’s interference was “communicated directly to President Barack Obama.” Former administration officials involved with Russian policy say the Kremlin saw Clinton as taking a harder line against Russia – “reset” notwithstanding – than others in the White House. “And they say Putin sees Clinton as a forceful proponent of “regime change” policies that the Russian leader considers a grave threat to his own survival.”

That is why the Russians may have tried to undermine Hillary Clinton, not because they see Trump as an ally. Like most of the world, Moscow no doubt expected Clinton to win. Coming into office weakened by Putin’s meddling would have undoubtedly pleased Moscow no end.

Obama’s call for an investigation is transparently bogus. First, the CIA offers up only scant circumstantial evidence – evidence that even the New York Times admits “does not support firm judgements” -- to make the charge that Russia worked to favor Trump. The FBI isn’t even on board with the conclusion.

Second, everyone knows that no serious inquiry could possibly be completed by January 20, when Trump will be sworn in. The federal government operates with glacial pacing; Obama knows the report will likely never be completed, and so the issue of Russian hacking will hang like a cloud – like the “birther” rumors – over the Trump White House.

While muttering about how the need for “transparency” might inspire the investigation into the hacking, the Times et al ignore the reality: the emails released via WikiLeaks that outed cheating by the DNC in favor of Hillary Clinton, or showed how disrespectful her camp was of Catholics and average Americans, actually increased the transparency of the election. The United States should not tolerate cyberattacks from a foreign government; nor should we tolerate cheating in our politics.

Obama is still smarting from having put himself on the line during the campaign, telling the Black Congressional Caucus, for instance, “I will consider it a personal insult, an insult to my legacy, if this community lets down its guard and fails to activate itself in this election.”

He made Hillary’s campaign all about him, but she lost anyway. That has to sting. Especially since Americans, in choosing Trump, also chose to undo most of Obama’s most precious accomplishments.

On the campaign trail, Trump made no secret of his desire to toss Obama’s climate agenda, his Iran deal and, most importantly, ObamaCare. In recent weeks, he has nominated cabinet officials who are well suited to carrying out those promises. Lofting Scott Pruit, the Oklahoma Attorney General, to the EPA: good-bye overreaching anti-fossil fuel regulations. Rep. Tom Price for HHS: so long ObamaCare. “Mad Dog” Mattis for Defense: the Iran deal is toast. For a president who has put such stock in his “legacy”, and who took office being compared to Abraham Lincoln, the erasure of his eight years must be intolerable.

What will be left of the Obama presidency, which chose to act unilaterally through executive actions and regulations rather than work through Congress? Not much.

Actually, with his embarrassing reluctance to shoulder any responsibility for the drubbing given Democrats over the past eight years, his legacy will begin with a very sour taste in the country’s mouth.



Liz Peek is a writer who contributes frequently to FoxNews.com. She is a financial columnist who also writes for The Fiscal Times. For more visit LizPeek.com. Follow her on [email protected]
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

So you agree that the Russian interfered...

From your article:

Quote

That is why the Russians may have tried to undermine Hillary Clinton,



And those who complain that another nation tried to interfere with your election process is of no concern to you?

This has been going on for decades. Remember Obama and Hillary messing with Israel's election? I do
That is why I want voter ID's

In any event remember this is an opinion piece.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rehmwa

My short reaction to this -

1 - nothing that was 'leaked' or a 'surprise' news or announcement was anything earth shattering. I believe worse about both candidates than any surprise info. In otherwords, the info was 'meh'.

2 - I trust the voters to vote as they will.

I'd be more worried about the ability to vote tamper. That's more scary than the voters actually voting with bad data. They already vote with bad data.



The effect they were going for was to create another headline that had the words "Hillary" and "Email" in them. In that regard they were very effective. The target audience is known to not look further into the issue than what they're fed over headlines.
"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0