Did Russia "hack" the election? Four questions.

[Lewdog]

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.

There is no worthwhile investigation. The primary evidence is long compromised. The Fed Govt refused to act when it SHOULD have to preserve and INSPECT the evidence. No one apparently did that. So the "spittle" is all coming from YOUR direction. Because nobody is asking the RIGHT questions. And that is suspicious..

You dont KNOW who inspected the evidence on Podesta's phone. But you're CERTAIN that the El Cheeto Grande is spending $Bills. -- you're got a cart and no horse.

Ok, so the FBI said they didn't look at the server, how do you know none of the 17 intelligence agencies didn't? Are you privy to classified information that the rest of us aren't?

Because nothing in their reports or the news SAYS that they examined the evidence. Can you provide a link that says they had access to Podesta's phone or the DNC machines?? They NEVER were activated when the crime was fresh. The DNC got to control EVERYTHING ANYBODY knows about their "hacking problem"..

If I'm wrong on this -- CERTAINLY someone here would have corrected me by now. They sat with multiple digits up their asses for MONTHS -- until the surprise win by Trump. And NOW -- they are covering their asses with "opinions" that are VOID of first hand evidence.

Again, do are you privy to the highly classified information the rest of us aren't? Can you please quit asking questions that can't be answered by any of us because we don't have access to the information and using that as the main premise of your argument? That's like me taking the position that God doesn't exist because no one has ever met him and gotten his autograph.

 

[Lewdog]

Not sure why so many people think because none of the intelligence agencies looked at the servers personally that it makes a difference. The government uses outside contractors ALL THE TIME... they have to go through the same security clearance procedures that government officials go through... everything is the same, except they just aren't government employees.

 

[Lewdog]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

Hacking isn't illegal. It's dumb to say illegal hacking. The fact the Republicans weren't stupid enough to fall for the primitive email scam isn't the issue. What is the issue is that liberals are upset that someone made their corruption public. As if we didn't already know.

"Hacking isn't illegal."



You understand that he has to say "illegal hacking" because the term hacking is a broad term and that it is the type of hacking that makes it illegal?

Maybe you should go join a hacking forum so you can become a hacking expert.

Give an example of legal hacking. Maybe you should join a dog cock sucking forum. You can't find a career that will have you.

Haha give an example of legal hacking? You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. How about a very simple widely published one... like when the government had a third party hack the San Bernardino iPhone? You really have no clue about shit do you?

 

[Lewdog]

Yes, Assange and Putin are denying it, while American intelligence agencies and American legislators who have seen the intelligence say there is no doubt Russia did it.

Assange/Putin or Americans. I guess it depends on who you want to believe.
.

I believe facts. Post them up. And the CIA isn't "the Americans". They have a long track record of misleading us and dragging us into all kinds of shit so no, I don't hold their opinions as Gospel. and it doesn't mean I support Putin. But that's about the speed of your toggle switch on/off brain.

How about the other 16 agencies... Wilfully putting your head in the sand seems to be your only defense...

You are going for if I am dumb enough I don't have to understand....

Trump's Chief of Staff has now admitted it...

17 agencies looking for the same thing and no solid evidence? That should speak to you.

Give us the evidence they are wrong...
They are qualified, you are not...
They have the information, you don't...

So explain how you know more?

I know the evidence isn't there because I've heard from many so far that would know. I know you are brain damaged but if they had solid evidence it would be out there. Post where they said "We have evidence they hacked x server on x day".

But the larger issue is the Democrat corruption, no hack would have mattered.

Let me guess, you heard all that on an internet forum like where you get all your education from?

 

[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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

Well lets just ask this question...

If 17 intelligence agencies found out that Cuba had released RNC emails and spread fake to distort the US Election... That they also cyber attacked the Dept of Defense. Hillary was admirer of Raul and called him a great leader and pandered at every opportunity... Her Campaign Manager was heavily ties commercially to Cuban as well, but Hillary denies all ties...

I would expect fits of despair...

What fake news was released except by the MSM in favor of Hillary?

 

[Seawytch]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

Well lets just ask this question...

If 17 intelligence agencies found out that Cuba had released RNC emails and spread fake to distort the US Election... That they also cyber attacked the Dept of Defense. Hillary was admirer of Raul and called him a great leader and pandered at every opportunity... Her Campaign Manager was heavily ties commercially to Cuban as well, but Hillary denies all ties...

I would expect fits of despair...

What fake news was released except by the MSM in favor of Hillary?

Read the 25 page report on the hacking. It's mentioned as one of the propaganda techniques Putin deployed in his goal to hurt Hillary Clinton.

 

[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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

Well lets just ask this question...

If 17 intelligence agencies found out that Cuba had released RNC emails and spread fake to distort the US Election... That they also cyber attacked the Dept of Defense. Hillary was admirer of Raul and called him a great leader and pandered at every opportunity... Her Campaign Manager was heavily ties commercially to Cuban as well, but Hillary denies all ties...

I would expect fits of despair...

What fake news was released except by the MSM in favor of Hillary?

Read the 25 page report on the hacking. It's mentioned as one of the propaganda techniques Putin deployed in his goal to hurt Hillary Clinton.

Was it as fake as the report that Trump made fun of a reporter's disability?

If Russia did anything it had no effect on the election. Hillary lost because she is hillary. I would like to hear from of the the thousands who changed their vote because of anything the Russians did.

Your guys lost, elections have consequences. I didn't think one of the consequences would be the left wing going so anti-American. But I should have known.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

IF we're going to drop sanctions on every country that posts propaganda about American elections and candidates we're going to have to drop them on pretty much every nation on the planet...

(RT News propaganda being the leading "evidence" our government has provided for linking the hacking to Putin.)

They illegally hacked one side...

Sure are alot of Fredo in this bunch...

The NY Times, against Trump's wishes, released Trump's '95 tax returns. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

ABC released that decade old hot mic tape of Trump grabbin' 'em by the pussy. What was the similar dirt they dug up on Hillary?

If not being angry at Russia for only releasing dirt on one candidate and not the other makes one a "Fredo", what do we call the NY Times and ABC, who both actually ENGAGED in one sided information leaking? Benedict Arnolds? If such an action is cause for international sanctions, what sort of official action should we take against these traitorous propaganda agencies?

 

[EverCurious]

*cough* Let me again introduce you all to the WHITE HACKERS - What is a White Hat Hacker? - Definition from Techopedia

As in CROWDSTRIKE and our the cyber folks in our 17 agencies are all white hackers - so yes hacking /is/ 100% legal at times.

 

[Seawytch]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

Well lets just ask this question...

If 17 intelligence agencies found out that Cuba had released RNC emails and spread fake to distort the US Election... That they also cyber attacked the Dept of Defense. Hillary was admirer of Raul and called him a great leader and pandered at every opportunity... Her Campaign Manager was heavily ties commercially to Cuban as well, but Hillary denies all ties...

I would expect fits of despair...

What fake news was released except by the MSM in favor of Hillary?

Read the 25 page report on the hacking. It's mentioned as one of the propaganda techniques Putin deployed in his goal to hurt Hillary Clinton.

Was it as fake as the report that Trump made fun of a reporter's disability?

If Russia did anything it had no effect on the election. Hillary lost because she is hillary. I would like to hear from of the the thousands who changed their vote because of anything the Russians did.

Your guys lost, elections have consequences. I didn't think one of the consequences would be the left wing going so anti-American. But I should have known.

If Wikileaks had "no effect", why did Trump mention them close to 200 times in the month leading up to the election?

The Intelligence Report did not make any conclusions as to whether Russia's proven attempt to harm Hillary Clinton was in fact successful. Trump lied about that after receiving his classified briefing. He didn't realize the American public would be reading the unclassified version of it the next day.

 

[Mac1958]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

 

[tinydancer]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

With all due respect I'm not going to buy into any of this fairy tale because no government agency to date has examined the DNC servers.

That's flat out koo koo bye bye looney tunes that the public should buy into a report with no evidence.

CrowdStrike is the tech agency that the FBI, the CIA and others are basing the report on information from an outside agency?

That was hired by the DNC?

Are we nuts?

 

[tinydancer]

Not sure why so many people think because none of the intelligence agencies looked at the servers personally that it makes a difference. The government uses outside contractors ALL THE TIME... they have to go through the same security clearance procedures that government officials go through... everything is the same, except they just aren't government employees.

Oh really? Even when that so called outside contractor is bought and paid for by the DNC?

Are you freaking kidding me?

Oh no bloody bias there.

 

[Mac1958]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

With all due respect I'm not going to buy into any of this fairy tale because no government agency to date has examined the DNC servers.

That's flat out koo koo bye bye looney tunes that the public should buy into a report with no evidence.

CrowdStrike is the tech agency that the FBI, the CIA and others are basing the report on information from an outside agency?

That was hired by the DNC?

Are we nuts?

Trump acknowledges Russia role in US election hacking, aide Priebus says
Graham, McCain want Russia sanctions after election hacking

It's perfectly fair and reasonable to argue that the public has not seen all the evidence yet, whatever it is, sure.

But there are Republicans who have. And, if nothing else, I think a reasonable Republican would show more real concern than many are.
.

 

[Seawytch]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

Republicans are clearly choosing party over country in this instance. Can you cite a similar instance from Democrats history?

 

[tinydancer]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

With all due respect I'm not going to buy into any of this fairy tale because no government agency to date has examined the DNC servers.

That's flat out koo koo bye bye looney tunes that the public should buy into a report with no evidence.

CrowdStrike is the tech agency that the FBI, the CIA and others are basing the report on information from an outside agency?

That was hired by the DNC?

Are we nuts?

Trump acknowledges Russia role in US election hacking, aide Priebus says
Graham, McCain want Russia sanctions after election hacking

It's perfectly fair and reasonable to argue that the public has not seen all the evidence yet, whatever it is, sure.

But there are Republicans who have. And, if nothing else, I think a reasonable Republican would show more real concern than many are.
.

That headline is twisted. Priebus said Trump is not denying that Russian entities could be behind the hacking.

Priebus said he personally beleived it was Russia. But the heart of the matter is this. The public is being asked to believe that Putin is behind the attacks. A world leader with no evidence linking the hacking to Putin.

I've been saying there is more than one country that could have done the dirty and for good reason. Take Israeli hackers for example. Motive? Obama tried desperately in the last Israeli election to oust Bibi by supporting Netenyahu's opposition.

Try Egyptian hackers. Motive? Obama and Clinton punished Egyptians by giving them the terror group the Muslim Brotherhood. I know if I was a Coptic Christian in Egypt I'd want payback.

The list is actuallt endless for suspects. Don't forget the NSA was busted for targeting over 123 world leaders and their governments. Oh and hundreds of global businesses.

And the man that's at the head of the intelligence community, James Clapper lied his ass off under oath during that investigation. He's also the asshole who attempted to portray the MB as a secular entity. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Why should anyone trust the CIA either. They are the ones that came up with the talking points of a video causing the deaths at Bengazi. I beleive the one man in particular, Mellon endorsed Hillary.

These agencies have become politicized. And that's bloody dangerous as all get out.

 

[hadit]

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.

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

If, after this election, the major parties do NOT take serious steps to improve their cyber security, they deserve to lose. One of the reasons I distrusted Hillary was her cavalier attitude towards email security, and I simply don't care if it sank to the level of a crime or not.

 

[Theowl32]

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?
.

Mac, it would depend on what was revealed. That is the point. Trust me. If it was revealed that the RNC set things up like the DNC did, we would be pissed.

Not sure why you constantly ignore us crushing the establishment RINOS. All of us true conservatives do.

Everyone from Limbaugh to Savage to us on here. Crush the RINOS for being left wing socialists while selling themselves as conservatives.

Why do you ignore that?

 

[Mac1958]

Republicans are clearly choosing party over country in this instance. Can you cite a similar instance from Democrats history?

Holy crap, sure.

The way they have leveraged race for generations, doing virtually nothing to heal wounds, for political gain.

The way they have divided Americans into little grievance groups, doing virtually nothing to heal wounds, for political gain.

The way they have enabled young American minds on American college campuses to become examples of hate & intolerance, for political gain.

Obviously.

Was this a trick question?
.

 

[Mac1958]

It would be helpful, for the sake of the country, to back away from the partisan political angle here and discuss whether we care that the Russians worked to influence an American presidential election.

I would think that both major parties would be outraged. That doesn't have anything to do with who won, nor does it mean that Trump gets kicked out or penalized or anything else. He won, and that's it.

The Russians fucked with our election, whether it was effective or not. They more than just tried, they were successful in at least pushing in one direction. That doesn't appear to bother the side that won, and I find that pretty troubling.
.

So what if they did, and you are making huge jump to say they did influence the election. Just as much, if not worse shit was revealed about Trump as was Hillary. So one would think it would even out no matter who hacked what.

I would like anyone in the entire nation to admit that the emails made a difference to who they voted. They didn't make a difference to you or me so why do you assume that there are so many dumber than you? I think because that is the way liberals roll. Liberals just can't accept that their world view isn't the popular world view. And if it is proven not to be then the proof is suspect.

Hillary told you what questioning the election was, an attack on the Republic, why do you keep attacking the Republic?

Guess what, someone right now, I will bet, is trying to hack into your emails. And if you responded to bogus web sites or kept your own unprotected server in your bathroom then you deserve to be hacked and if that hack lead to you losing an election, it didn't but if it did, guess who you would have to blame.

Straw man. I've never said they influenced the election. There is no way to accurately quantify such a thing.

I'm saying that I'd think Americans of all ideological stripes would feel and express outrage that the Russians would even try and then get that far.

That's it. And unfortunately, that's not what is happening. Instead, it's being mocked and minimized, it's no big deal, for very obvious reasons.

And yes, left wingers do the same thing, hence my sig. Opposite sides of the same coin. Party over country.
.

With all due respect I'm not going to buy into any of this fairy tale because no government agency to date has examined the DNC servers.

That's flat out koo koo bye bye looney tunes that the public should buy into a report with no evidence.

CrowdStrike is the tech agency that the FBI, the CIA and others are basing the report on information from an outside agency?

That was hired by the DNC?

Are we nuts?

Trump acknowledges Russia role in US election hacking, aide Priebus says
Graham, McCain want Russia sanctions after election hacking

It's perfectly fair and reasonable to argue that the public has not seen all the evidence yet, whatever it is, sure.

But there are Republicans who have. And, if nothing else, I think a reasonable Republican would show more real concern than many are.
.

That headline is twisted. Priebus said Trump is not denying that Russian entities could be behind the hacking.

Priebus said he personally beleived it was Russia. But the heart of the matter is this. The public is being asked to believe that Putin is behind the attacks. A world leader with no evidence linking the hacking to Putin.

I've been saying there is more than one country that could have done the dirty and for good reason. Take Israeli hackers for example. Motive? Obama tried desperately in the last Israeli election to oust Bibi by supporting Netenyahu's opposition.

Try Egyptian hackers. Motive? Obama and Clinton punished Egyptians by giving them the terror group the Muslim Brotherhood. I know if I was a Coptic Christian in Egypt I'd want payback.

The list is actuallt endless for suspects. Don't forget the NSA was busted for targeting over 123 world leaders and their governments. Oh and hundreds of global businesses.

And the man that's at the head of the intelligence community, James Clapper lied his ass off under oath during that investigation. He's also the asshole who attempted to portray the MB as a secular entity. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Why should anyone trust the CIA either. They are the ones that came up with the talking points of a video causing the deaths at Bengazi. I beleive the one man in particular, Mellon endorsed Hillary.

These agencies have become politicized. And that's bloody dangerous as all get out.

Well, we seem to have Assange & Putin on one side of this issue, and American intelligence agencies on the other.

One side is less likely to have America's best interests at heart.
.