Did Russia "hack" the election? Four questions.

[eddiew37]

We need to question our government, who is Assange to question our government, what creeds has he got?

Anyone should question government but questioning the left gets you killed.

Thought you were lost and gone forever?? Chump too

 

[Cellblock2429]

So, four reasonable questions:

No, there is only one reasonable question.

Why were the Russians so keen on getting Trump elected?

This is the question you like to avoid, you want to treat the Russian Hacking like it was a big prank Yuri and Vlad came up with after a long vodka bender at the Kremlin.

Instead of being concerned that a foreign power would invest millions of dollars (or rubles) to try to get one candidate elected over another.

Why did the Russians hack Trumps tax returns then?

/---- Maybe they couldn't hack the IRS.

 

[jc456]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

How you figure, you can't prove that.

 

[jc456]

Okay, just for the hell of it, let's try to define what the question "Did Russia Hack the Election?" actually means.

If I have this right, I don't believe anyone is saying that Russia somehow got into voting booths or hacked into voting machines or computers or servers and changed votes from Hillary to Trump. If I'm wrong on that, if you believe that, please say so and provide whatever evidence you have.

I believe that what is being said is that the Russians "hacked" into Podesta's and other DNC people's email accounts via phishing and got oodles of seriously damning shit on the Democrats, spilled the beans, and here we are. They are saying that an unfriendly foreign power found and used a method of influencing opinions on a major party presidential candidate, and it may have made enough of a difference in a close race. That's it, unless I'm missing something.

So, four reasonable questions:

1. Was Podesta, was the DNC, an easy mark for this activity, did they screw up? Yeah, it appears so.
2. Did the Russians try to hack the RNC too? Entirely possible, no one can say for sure either way.
3. Could all the shit that came out from the hacked emails been the final straw against Clinton, particularly in those rust belt states where Trump barely beat her and gained critical electoral votes? Yeah, that seems like a reasonable possibility.
   
4. And finally, if Trump had been the one whose party's emails were hacked and Hillary won critical electoral states by a hair, would his supporters be screaming right now? Of course.

So what is YOUR definition of "hacking"?
.

Assange said it was leaked by someone in the DNC

 

[Lewdog]

Nice little tid bit I found in an article today...

"Susan Hennessey, a former NSA official, told The Daily Beast that the unclassified report leaves “big looming unanswered questions, including the ones no one really wants to ask”—that is, whether an American citizen who may have been connected to the Trump campaign “had knowledge of or participated in the operation.” There is currently no evidence of such a connection, but Graham said on “Meet the Press” that he believes there is an ongoing investigation into those potential links, adding: “I don’t want to speak for them.”"

Top Trump Advisors Struggle to Explain His Response to Russia Report

So the U.S. intelligence agencies are still doing some research trying to tie someone in Trump's campaign to Russia and the hack... and this is coming from Lyndsey Graham who has been briefed by the intelligence agencies.

 

[eddiew37]

Okay, just for the hell of it, let's try to define what the question "Did Russia Hack the Election?" actually means.

If I have this right, I don't believe anyone is saying that Russia somehow got into voting booths or hacked into voting machines or computers or servers and changed votes from Hillary to Trump. If I'm wrong on that, if you believe that, please say so and provide whatever evidence you have.

I believe that what is being said is that the Russians "hacked" into Podesta's and other DNC people's email accounts via phishing and got oodles of seriously damning shit on the Democrats, spilled the beans, and here we are. They are saying that an unfriendly foreign power found and used a method of influencing opinions on a major party presidential candidate, and it may have made enough of a difference in a close race. That's it, unless I'm missing something.

So, four reasonable questions:

1. Was Podesta, was the DNC, an easy mark for this activity, did they screw up? Yeah, it appears so.
2. Did the Russians try to hack the RNC too? Entirely possible, no one can say for sure either way.
3. Could all the shit that came out from the hacked emails been the final straw against Clinton, particularly in those rust belt states where Trump barely beat her and gained critical electoral votes? Yeah, that seems like a reasonable possibility.
   
4. And finally, if Trump had been the one whose party's emails were hacked and Hillary won critical electoral states by a hair, would his supporters be screaming right now? Of course.

So what is YOUR definition of "hacking"?
.

Assange said it was leaked by someone in the DNC

Did he now??? lol Tell me you believe anything out of that sb's mouth

 

[jc456]

Okay, just for the hell of it, let's try to define what the question "Did Russia Hack the Election?" actually means.

If I have this right, I don't believe anyone is saying that Russia somehow got into voting booths or hacked into voting machines or computers or servers and changed votes from Hillary to Trump. If I'm wrong on that, if you believe that, please say so and provide whatever evidence you have.

I believe that what is being said is that the Russians "hacked" into Podesta's and other DNC people's email accounts via phishing and got oodles of seriously damning shit on the Democrats, spilled the beans, and here we are. They are saying that an unfriendly foreign power found and used a method of influencing opinions on a major party presidential candidate, and it may have made enough of a difference in a close race. That's it, unless I'm missing something.

So, four reasonable questions:

1. Was Podesta, was the DNC, an easy mark for this activity, did they screw up? Yeah, it appears so.
2. Did the Russians try to hack the RNC too? Entirely possible, no one can say for sure either way.
3. Could all the shit that came out from the hacked emails been the final straw against Clinton, particularly in those rust belt states where Trump barely beat her and gained critical electoral votes? Yeah, that seems like a reasonable possibility.
   
4. And finally, if Trump had been the one whose party's emails were hacked and Hillary won critical electoral states by a hair, would his supporters be screaming right now? Of course.

So what is YOUR definition of "hacking"?
.

Assange said it was leaked by someone in the DNC

Did he now??? lol Tell me you believe anything out of that sb's mouth

Why not, he got it and Seth Rich is dead

 

[asaratis]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

RNC had better firewalls. Either that or they got hacked and there was nothing disturbing found to expose.

 

[Clementine]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

I guess one was better at security.

 

[flacaltenn]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

RNC had better firewalls. Either that or they got hacked and there was nothing disturbing found to expose.

Well someone needs to sort this out. The RNC denies it. BUT the same "Intelligence Agencies" that are SURE the Russians did both the hacking and release of DNC documents, APPARENTLY said with HIGH CONFIDENCE, that the RNC was hacked.

Intelligence: Russians hacked RNC too, to hurt Clinton, help Trump

By DAVID E. SANGER and Scott Shane
The New York Times
WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald Trump, according to senior administration officials.

They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.


My question is -- if they got this wrong -- how HIGH is the confidence really?

Don't you feel all warm and fuzzy about the safe hands we all are in??

 

[Lewdog]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

RNC had better firewalls. Either that or they got hacked and there was nothing disturbing found to expose.

Well someone needs to sort this out. The RNC denies it. BUT the same "Intelligence Agencies" that are SURE the Russians did both the hacking and release of DNC documents, APPARENTLY said with HIGH CONFIDENCE, that the RNC was hacked.

Intelligence: Russians hacked RNC too, to hurt Clinton, help Trump

By DAVID E. SANGER and Scott Shane
The New York Times
WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald Trump, according to senior administration officials.

They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.


My question is -- if they got this wrong -- how HIGH is the confidence really?

Don't you feel all warm and fuzzy about the safe hands we all are in??

I'd like to know why you are so opposed to the federal intelligence agencies being right... and want them to be wrong? Not trying to be a dick... but it sure seems like you have an ax to grind.

 

[flacaltenn]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

I guess one was better at security.

First the Intel agencies say HIGH CONFIDENCE that the RNC was hacked. And now -- nobody is sure it happened?? Doesn't that disturb EVERYONE trying to follow along here? Makes you want to ask questions of whether ANY of these agencies actually INSPECTED any of the systems they are opining on. Which I asked in an active thread of mine..

Or whether they are all blowing smoke and writing reports that PLEASE the people who appointed them...

 

[flacaltenn]

There are those of us who voted Trump that wouldn't be screaming if a foreign entity revealed accurate information about him.

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

RNC had better firewalls. Either that or they got hacked and there was nothing disturbing found to expose.

Well someone needs to sort this out. The RNC denies it. BUT the same "Intelligence Agencies" that are SURE the Russians did both the hacking and release of DNC documents, APPARENTLY said with HIGH CONFIDENCE, that the RNC was hacked.

Intelligence: Russians hacked RNC too, to hurt Clinton, help Trump

By DAVID E. SANGER and Scott Shane
The New York Times
WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald Trump, according to senior administration officials.

They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.


My question is -- if they got this wrong -- how HIGH is the confidence really?

Don't you feel all warm and fuzzy about the safe hands we all are in??

I'd like to know why you are so opposed to the federal intelligence agencies being right... and want them to be wrong? Not trying to be a dick... but it sure seems like you have an ax to grind.

I have a very regard for them. And I FEAR -- they are losing credibility due to political posturing and shenanigans. That's my "axe"... I don't want to see THEM dragged down into the same tribal pit fight that the FBI recently got into.. Is that OK with you? Why don't you tell us WHY we still dont know about their "high confidence that the RNC was hacked by the Russians"..

Aren't YOU worried by that??

 

[Lewdog]

You really don't think that, had Russia done this to the Republicans and Trump lost, that they would be complaining?
.

I thought the Intel "opinions" were that the RNC had also been hacked. In fact, the FBI tried to warn BOTH nearly simultaneously back in July or August..

RNC had better firewalls. Either that or they got hacked and there was nothing disturbing found to expose.

Well someone needs to sort this out. The RNC denies it. BUT the same "Intelligence Agencies" that are SURE the Russians did both the hacking and release of DNC documents, APPARENTLY said with HIGH CONFIDENCE, that the RNC was hacked.

Intelligence: Russians hacked RNC too, to hurt Clinton, help Trump

By DAVID E. SANGER and Scott Shane
The New York Times
WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald Trump, according to senior administration officials.

They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.


My question is -- if they got this wrong -- how HIGH is the confidence really?

Don't you feel all warm and fuzzy about the safe hands we all are in??

I'd like to know why you are so opposed to the federal intelligence agencies being right... and want them to be wrong? Not trying to be a dick... but it sure seems like you have an ax to grind.

I have a very regard for them. And I FEAR -- they are losing credibility due to political posturing and shenanigans. That's my "axe"... I don't want to see THEM dragged down into the same tribal pit fight that the FBI recently got into.. Is that OK with you? Why don't you tell us WHY we still dont know about their "high confidence that the RNC was hacked by the Russians"..

Aren't YOU worried by that??

The RNC has admitted that there was an attempted hack. Why don't you instead worry about how the RNC knows that there was an attempted hack, but that they weren't successfully hacked? How do they know they weren't actually hacked? Because information wasn't released publicly? You ever think that maybe, just maybe the Russians did get info but they are saving it to use as blackmail? Wouldn't it make sense to get the President in that you want by releasing hacked into on the other party... and then saving the information on the party you got into power for a later date as blackmail power? I'm just spitballing common sense here...

 

[jbander]

That's just it... politics hasn't gotten so divided Trump supporters only care about one thing, their candidate won. They don't care how he won, what his private dealings are, or if he lies to them. As long as they can hang their hat on the fact he won the election, that's all they care about, period.

..and yet another retarded statement. One idiotic comment after the next and you think you know what you're talking about.

You supporting or OKing the idea that Russia hacked the election shows the low level of people that belong to the hate party, You do know that Small Hands has said they did hack the democrats. And saying that is OK or shouldn't be looked at is very high on the scum meter.

You belong to the party of hate, not me. You lied about what I said and believe and backed it up with childish insults.

Go suck a long steamy dog turd.

My insults are good , yours are kind of transparent , speaking volumes of who you are and what you think of and get off on in life. Your a little sickening. Lied about what you said , there would be no need for me to do that with the lexicon of stupid from you that I could draw from.

You lied, smeared and now do a little school girl snivel?

LOL

I lied about you poor baby. You offer nothing except nonsense.

 

[Freewill]

Okay, just for the hell of it, let's try to define what the question "Did Russia Hack the Election?" actually means.

If I have this right, I don't believe anyone is saying that Russia somehow got into voting booths or hacked into voting machines or computers or servers and changed votes from Hillary to Trump. If I'm wrong on that, if you believe that, please say so and provide whatever evidence you have.

I believe that what is being said is that the Russians "hacked" into Podesta's and other DNC people's email accounts via phishing and got oodles of seriously damning shit on the Democrats, spilled the beans, and here we are. They are saying that an unfriendly foreign power found and used a method of influencing opinions on a major party presidential candidate, and it may have made enough of a difference in a close race. That's it, unless I'm missing something.

So, four reasonable questions:

1. Was Podesta, was the DNC, an easy mark for this activity, did they screw up? Yeah, it appears so.
2. Did the Russians try to hack the RNC too? Entirely possible, no one can say for sure either way.
3. Could all the shit that came out from the hacked emails been the final straw against Clinton, particularly in those rust belt states where Trump barely beat her and gained critical electoral votes? Yeah, that seems like a reasonable possibility.
   
4. And finally, if Trump had been the one whose party's emails were hacked and Hillary won critical electoral states by a hair, would his supporters be screaming right now? Of course.

So what is YOUR definition of "hacking"?
.

The emails meant almost nothing. I can't remember any of them.

Hillary lost for one reason, and it is time for you and whomever voted for her to realize it. Hillary lost because of one thing, she is Hillary. For crying out loud could the nomination go to anyone that was a worse candidate then Trump?

How about the leaked locker room talk from Trump, what is that different then leaked emails that the voting public should know about.

This whole hacking shit has to be the worse butt balm ever created.

 

[jbander]

Trump does not carry the football. The military does. Trump cannot nuke anyone by himself. There are safeguards in place to prevent what you fear.

You need to disavow yourself of some of your misconception you have displayed above. Watch the 4 min. video to help yourself become better informed.
~~ The President's Nuclear Football Video - White House - HISTORY.com ~~

Trump cannot nuke someone because he's butthurt about being insulted. That was the implication I was addressing. Thank you for further knowledge. Always appreciated.

He's insane, he is a psychopath and yes he can push the little red button that the hate party sat this psychopath next to. Let me see should I believe a dumb fuck hater who knows nothing and who's comments aren't attached to reality 99% of the time or should I believe Brookings Institute "The president of the United States can, in theory, launch nuclear war by personal decision—without any checks or balances. Whether we really think any of the candidates for president in 2016 would cavalierly start a nuclear war, the bombastic and bizarre character of much of this year’s electoral debate should make us take this question seriously. Someday, the United States really could have a mentally ill president who chose to do the unthinkable. The odds are low, but we should seek to make them even lower, given the stakes at hand. Because it looks like humankind will be stuck with the nuclear bomb for many decades (if not centuries) to come, moreover, the solution to this problem cannot be simply to get rid of all existing nuclear arsenals. We need a more immediate answer." Where does electing a psychopath and putting him next to the little red button that once pushed destroys mankind rate on the stupid scale.

 

[jbander]

You have no proof that anyone paid anyone for any agitating. But you keep saying it as though it actually happened. That's what nutbags do.

There was no proof of Trump running around grabbing pussies either, just the words. But that's different.

Well, he said that's what he did. Are you calling him a liar? Are you saying we can't take him at his word? Okay.

Of course he is a liar, as is Clinton. Both candidates were awful.

What does Clinton have to do with electing a Psychopath, a dangerous psychopath and putting said psychopath next to the little red button that will destroy mankind once pushed. Forget your long list of stupid lies about Clinton killing people , I'll give you 100 videos' proving that Small Hands is nuts.

Well, he said that's what he did. Are you calling him a liar? Are you saying we can't take him at his word? Okay.

Of course he is a liar, as is Clinton. Both candidates were awful.

What does Clinton have to do with electing a Psychopath, a dangerous psychopath and putting said psychopath next to the little red button that will destroy mankind once pushed. Forget your long list of stupid lies about Clinton killing people , I'll give you 100 videos' proving that Small Hands is nuts.

I've never accused her of killing anyone. She is proven to be extremely careless with national security when it is convenient for her. That is dangerous and has long term consequences. It is a deal breaker for me. Trump does not carry the football. The military does. Trump cannot nuke anyone by himself. There are safeguards in place to prevent what you fear.

Awesome. You really think Trump is a better bet for our national security....but you are banking on someone being there to help him if he needs to make a decision.

Really awesome.

I was pointing out the idea that Trump is going to use nukes like he uses Twitter is hyperbole.

NO he won because of the EC and ah's that believed the liar Now he wants to befriend the gov't that hacked our election ,and people are stupid not to want to be friends with Russia ? You elected a mad man now reap the whirlwind

Unhinged...like many on the Left.

Why do they have crazy tendencies?

What is a person called who supports and elects a psychopath into office and park that psychopath next to the little red button that once pushed destroys mankind.

A republican??

WEll This is where I have to admit I have a problem, They are no longer Republicans and for a decade they were regressive, only wanting to bring us back to the dark ages but now they are simply the hate party, there could be no other name for a party that elects a hate candidate. Now this is the problem are they hateacans or conservihaters or what. I'm open for suggestions.

Trumpovitches sounds good

Possible but somehow if psychopath and scum bag somehow could be incorporated then everyone would know who we are talking about. Keep thinking though. You are on the right track.

 

[jbander]

You have no proof that anyone paid anyone for any agitating. But you keep saying it as though it actually happened. That's what nutbags do.

There was no proof of Trump running around grabbing pussies either, just the words. But that's different.

Just the words out of his own mouth BUT we all know the pos is a degenerate liar Right?

Yes, we all know that BOTH candidates are liars. There are no points to be scored on honesty or integrity. Both candidates get a big fat zero in that category.

I'll give you 100 videos of small hands lying , the hate party gives you a list of a few unimportant lies that are way open to the possibility that they could be multiple things other then lies , but when you hate at the level of the hate party , all of them are lies. Yes there are more serious lies ,She has on average about the same amount of lies as every one of the hate party politicians, but 1/10 of the lies that come from the mouth of Small Hands Rump. There list include the most stupid things imaginable. When they feel the pressure of reality that maybe their Hillary lie list is being laughed at , they add in Clintons sex affair. All of this having nothing to do with Small Hands now being the president elect and what comes out of his mouth. but we have to suffer , because we are dealing with stupid people.

What's with the small hands reference? Yes, you are stupid but we don't HAVE to deal with you. I do because you're fun. You smear shit like a little angry toddler and think it's smart.

What is this anal fetish that you come up with all the time. Are you weird that way. Now do you do this with your wife or boyfriend and it would seem by all of your comments about it that you would force it on them. Do you?????

 

[jbander]

Why isn't anyhing happening to Podesta who is the one to blame.

Who is that stupid to use password, as your passwod on g-mail?
Podesta that's who.
They need to go after him.

I have a program here that cost nothing that will find any password that exists , sometimes very quickly sometimes it take a while . So it kind of makes your point worthless.