Did Russia "hack" the election? Four questions.

[flacaltenn]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

 

[jbander]

It is much easier and acceptable (though entirely predictable) for the Ds/Big Ears to blame Russia for losing to Trump, rather than believe their failed and horrendously stupid policies were rejected by the American people.
No doubt Big Ears thinks Trump stole the election and as such, is illegitimate. The silver lining could be that the Ds double down on their stupid policies, resulting in the American people rejecting them for the foreseeable future.

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??

And how much money do you think trump has riding on getting putin to be his friend?

Do you thinkit could be a sexual thing. He wants to have sex with his daughter and he has repeated that multiple times, do you know if he is maybe bi or a closeted gay. Just wondering.

 

[jbander]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Hey ding bat Small Hands Rump has admitted that Russia hacked the dems. Keep up

 

[Lewdog]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

 

[jbander]

There are some several key points that the Russians were cheating on the American elections, according to this declassified report from the CIA, the FBI, and lastly, the National Security Agency, and their significant scope is that Russia is the only country creating this blurred line of this unprotected thing, and that is hacking.

Then we can safely dismiss everything they said. That's utter bullshit. China alone has stolen millions worth of intellectual property rights.

Listen MR dog turd ,TEll us again what China has to do with anything. Start a thread if you think it is interesting. but it just looks stupid stuck in this thread.

I explained it, Mr. Dog Turd sucker. I responded to the idiotic statement in bold.

You said something about it maybe but you surely didn't explain anything . China has nothing to do with Russia hacking the Dems . Its like arguing against Hillary by Bills sex life. It's stupid nonsense and dog turd that would be all you have.

 

[jbander]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

ON FOX <are you kidding me, Fox crap news isn't in any way a source for anything other then wing nuts and weak minds. Now this is a brain test, so first I have to ask if you have a brain. if the answer is yea then what does this mean "
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump


Are we talking about the same cyberattack where it was revealed that head of the DNC illegally gave Hillary the questions to the debate?

5:09 AM - 16 Dec 2016" How far blind fucking stupid are you going to take this to deny it means anything , go ahead but as you talk you will be hearing increased laughter with your every word added. To the end with a crescendo of millions laughing and rolling on the floor.

 

[flacaltenn]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

 

[flacaltenn]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Attempted hacks by Russians maybe. Not hacks by the forces of the Kremlin. They don't attempt. They make it happen...

There's a difference between "russians" doing it. And the GRU or other spooky Kremlin agency doing it.

 

[Lewdog]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Like I said... if the RNC KNOWS that the Russians attempted to hack their machine, how do they know the Russians didn't succeed at some point?

 

[jbander]

It is much easier and acceptable (though entirely predictable) for the Ds/Big Ears to blame Russia for losing to Trump, rather than believe their failed and horrendously stupid policies were rejected by the American people.
No doubt Big Ears thinks Trump stole the election and as such, is illegitimate. The silver lining could be that the Ds double down on their stupid policies, resulting in the American people rejecting them for the foreseeable future.

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.

You need to curtail your consumption of left wing fake news. It is mucking up your brain.

In the hunt for honesty gipper how much of what republicans threw at Hillary wasn't pure unadulterated BS ?? In your honest opinion

Sorry I don't mean to interrupt but in but 50% was totally wacko group that dig holes to live in information. but another 25% was stuff like she thought she was named after a mountain climber. Which has a bout a 75% chance that she really thought it was true. The rest puts her at about 10% of small hands lies, Easily proved by hundreds of videos of him lying. and about a little less then the average hate candidate.

 

[jbander]

There are some several key points that the Russians were cheating on the American elections, according to this declassified report from the CIA, the FBI, and lastly, the National Security Agency, and their significant scope is that Russia is the only country creating this blurred line of this unprotected thing, and that is hacking.

Then we can safely dismiss everything they said. That's utter bullshit. China alone has stolen millions worth of intellectual property rights.

Listen MR dog turd ,TEll us again what China has to do with anything. Start a thread if you think it is interesting. but it just looks stupid stuck in this thread.

Look, iceweasel, I am putting China off-topic, okay? Our focus is did Russians hack the election. This topic needs to be stayed. I am not Mr. Dog Turd, or Mr. Crack.

Sent from my LG-D415 using Tapatalk

China wasn't even the point. I used them as ONE example of hacking. Russia is in good company. You think we don't hack foreign systems? We probably do it more than anybody.

Idiot what can I say as you stand here supporting our general enimy's and giving them High fives and patting them on the back for hacking us, so it is OK with you and your party , which is 100% obvious by your traitor responses.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

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"?
.

"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."




52% of Dims actually do believe just that.

Majority of Democrats Think Russia Tampered With Vote Tallies, Despite No Evidence

Majority of Democrats Think Russia Tampered With Vote Tallies, Despite No Evidence

 

[jbander]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Attempted hacks by Russians maybe. Not hacks by the forces of the Kremlin. They don't attempt. They make it happen...

There's a difference between "russians" doing it. And the GRU or other spooky Kremlin agency doing it.

Ya I know these people are now your allies but the aren't to democrats. They hacked the dems. thats the whole story. You saying that its not Putin or the Russians but the KGB or any combination of who did and who didn't do it. is spittle coming out of the corners of your mouth. Doesn't make a fucking difference. Your supporting or denying that they did it. and you think you can twist it into something acceptable. The real fact is I believe Small Hands was Involved and I'm waiting to see if that is true and if it is , I want him out of office in front of a firing squad and you traitors that support him doing it, are the real enemy of this country. The extremist scum level of the hate party goes deeper into the gutter every day. They are down so deep now that the animals down there with them no longer have eyes.

 

[flacaltenn]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Like I said... if the RNC KNOWS that the Russians attempted to hack their machine, how do they know the Russians didn't succeed at some point?

Because this Admin never it took the affair seriously enough to DEMAND access to their machines to investigate it. That's why I'm angry. NONE of these opinions are based on examination of the PRIMARY EVIDENCE.. That's the point of this thread.

 

[jbander]

The DEMS were hacked! The ELECTION was not hacked! YOU are the IDIOT here! Fuck off, idiot!

I think many are going by the fake news headlines. Don't expect them to understand the finer points.

Of course, it might be that the DNC wasn't hacked at all. Assange had an insider leaking info and that is far different than hacking.

Hillary's server was likely hacked numerous times and we still have no idea who has that info. While some of it was released by WikiLeaks, that doesn't mean other countries don't have the same emails. And considering that Hillary claimed none of those emails existed, it just proves she thought she had deleted all of them.

The left still ignores the content of the emails and are only angry at the whistleblowers. Hypocrites!

It sure would be funny if the insider leaking Hillary's shit was her lady friend's husband, Carlos Danger. That would be such sweet irony.

Regarding Cankle's server, it is absurd to think it was not completely hacked by several sources. She is above the law, so she can do whatever she wants including really stupid shit.

Lets think about this, what is more serious wiki leaks that don't have the needed federal stamp on them verifying their truth or a president that wants to have sex with his daughter but still says it's ok for anyone to call his daughter a piece of ass, a man who raped his ex wife and grabs women that he doesn't even know by the pussy, (that was his words anyway) So anyone of you didpshits can now come in with one of her emails that is worse than small hands fantasy of sex with his daughter. make sure the one you bring though is timed stamped and stamped by the government. This should be easy.

 

[flacaltenn]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Attempted hacks by Russians maybe. Not hacks by the forces of the Kremlin. They don't attempt. They make it happen...

There's a difference between "russians" doing it. And the GRU or other spooky Kremlin agency doing it.

Ya I know these people are now your allies but the aren't to democrats. They hacked the dems. thats the whole story. You saying that its not Putin or the Russians but the KGB or any combination of who did and who didn't do it. is spittle coming out of the corners of your mouth. Doesn't make a fucking difference. Your supporting or denying that they did it. and you think you can twist it into something acceptable. The real fact is I believe Small Hands was Involved and I'm waiting to see if that is true and if it is , I want him out of office in front of a firing squad and you traitors that support him doing it, are the real enemy of this country. The extremist scum level of the hate party goes deeper into the gutter every day. They are down so deep now that the animals down there with them no longer have eyes.

What I'm saying is that NONE of the agencies with "opinions" ever laid hands or eyes on the primary evidence. You're leaping to conclusions that the ONLY intruders on the DNC machines were Russian Govt. The crime was never investigated by the highly paid and overstaffed agencies that keep getting bigger. But this affair was APPARENTLY not serious enough to unleash them when the trail was fresh.

You're repeating dogma. But you can't answer the questions I'm asking.

1) Which ones of the "17 intel agencies with an opinion" ever had ACCESS to the primary machines as evidence?
2) Which ones of the 17 ever inspected the Podesta phone?
3) Why did the FBI/Admin not PUSH the DNC (or RNC) for access of the affected machines?
4) Why do we HAVE 4 or 5 MAJOR counter cyber agencies and a dozen panels of wizards if we do not USE them in situations this serious? FIRE their asses. Just guess.. Like those with "opinions" are now doing.


Can you answer ANY of those? If not -- your "analysis" is worthless.

 

[Lewdog]

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...

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Like I said... if the RNC KNOWS that the Russians attempted to hack their machine, how do they know the Russians didn't succeed at some point?

Because this Admin never it took the affair seriously enough to DEMAND access to their machines to investigate it. That's why I'm angry. NONE of these opinions are based on examination of the PRIMARY EVIDENCE.. That's the point of this thread.

But your premise is to argue that the DNC did all this and then you argued that the intelligence community wasn't reliable because they said the RNC got hacked too. You opened the door to this. So I ask again, if the RNC KNOWS there was at least an attempted hack, then how do they know they weren't actually hacked? Reminds me of the scene from The Lost World. Where the Raptors would continually hit the electric fence in different areas... testing for a weakness. So since the RNC knows there was at least an attempted hack... do you really think the Russians would quit before actually hacking the system?

 

[jbander]

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.

MY opinion is that he is totally involved ,will they find the truth, don't know. You better believe, small hands if he is part of it, is spending billions to cover it up.

 

[flacaltenn]

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Like I said... if the RNC KNOWS that the Russians attempted to hack their machine, how do they know the Russians didn't succeed at some point?

Because this Admin never it took the affair seriously enough to DEMAND access to their machines to investigate it. That's why I'm angry. NONE of these opinions are based on examination of the PRIMARY EVIDENCE.. That's the point of this thread.

But your premise is to argue that the DNC did all this and then you argued that the intelligence community wasn't reliable because they said the RNC got hacked too. You opened the door to this. So I ask again, if the RNC KNOWS there was at least an attempted hack, then how do they know they weren't actually hacked? Reminds me of the scene from The Lost World. Where the Raptors would continually hit the electric fence in different areas... testing for a weakness. So since the RNC knows there was at least an attempted hack... do you really think the Russians would quit before actually hacking the system?

You just told me you heard Priebus SAY that they were "probed" not hacked. And now you're agreeing with me that Intel pros WOULD have gotten in. Are we agreeing there is enough stink here to back up and ask some more intelligent questions before WW3 starts??

 

[jbander]

No the RNC didn't acknowledge it. In fact Priebus DENIED it. The FBI says "it didn't happen" , but all those intel agencies have "HIGH CONFIDENCE" that it happened without apparently ever LOOKING at the servers. The same "high confidence" they have that only Russia infiltrated the DNC machines. MORE machines they never personally analyzed.

What's wrong with that picture?

State Intel groups hardly EVER release captured information. Because of the danger of comprising their sources and methods. It IS generally used as blackmail and leverage in negotiations.

Wrong... the RNC said there was an attempted hack. Preibus even admitted it this morning on Fox. You can watch the video in my Trump Concedes thread. He just said that their system was good enough that it stopped the hack.

You count ATTEMPTED hacks and my internet machines got 30 or 50 a day. That's not the same thing. A foreign power WILL succeed into almost any commercial machine. FBI does it routinely. .

Attempted hacks by Russians maybe. Not hacks by the forces of the Kremlin. They don't attempt. They make it happen...

There's a difference between "russians" doing it. And the GRU or other spooky Kremlin agency doing it.

Ya I know these people are now your allies but the aren't to democrats. They hacked the dems. thats the whole story. You saying that its not Putin or the Russians but the KGB or any combination of who did and who didn't do it. is spittle coming out of the corners of your mouth. Doesn't make a fucking difference. Your supporting or denying that they did it. and you think you can twist it into something acceptable. The real fact is I believe Small Hands was Involved and I'm waiting to see if that is true and if it is , I want him out of office in front of a firing squad and you traitors that support him doing it, are the real enemy of this country. The extremist scum level of the hate party goes deeper into the gutter every day. They are down so deep now that the animals down there with them no longer have eyes.

What I'm saying is that NONE of the agencies with "opinions" ever laid hands or eyes on the primary evidence. You're leaping to conclusions that the ONLY intruders on the DNC machines were Russian Govt. The crime was never investigated by the highly paid and overstaffed agencies that keep getting bigger. But this affair was APPARENTLY not serious enough to unleash them when the trail was fresh.

You're repeating dogma. But you can't answer the questions I'm asking.

1) Which ones of the "17 intel agencies with an opinion" ever had ACCESS to the primary machines as evidence?
2) Which ones of the 17 ever inspected the Podesta phone?
3) Why did the FBI/Admin not PUSH the DNC (or RNC) for access of the affected machines?
4) Why do we HAVE 4 or 5 MAJOR counter cyber agencies and a dozen panels of wizards if we do not USE them in situations this serious? FIRE their asses. Just guess.. Like those with "opinions" are now doing.


Can you answer ANY of those? If not -- your "analysis" is worthless.

Why should anyone answer your questions , this is still under investigation and Even small hands says the Dems where hacked by the Russians.