Influencing the Election

[SavannahMann]

That's the price we pay however the only hope for the common folk to regain the upper hand on the elitists that have been royally screwing us is for the public to get access to the behind the scenes information regarding what is really going on, the Media has failed at their responsibility so alternative means are all that is open to us.

I don't think that should include breaking the law or violating constitutional rights to privacy of any American. I'm sorry.... I just can't go along with that. I understand your frustration.... sometimes our frustration overcomes our emotions and we react in ways we shouldn't.

First off, you have "violating the constitutional rights to privacy" wrong, the 4th Amendment applies to the U.S. government not individual citizens, someone (private citizen or foreign operative) copying your emails and releasing them to the public doesn't violate your constitutionally protected rights, secondly the law is just an opinion on a piece of paper, the fact of the matter is that it is our "law makers" that are violating laws, ethics and generally accepted morality and it's about time the public became aware of exactly what they've been up to, if that means some "hacker" copying their emails (or voice recording them or video taping them or whatever) and releasing them to the public then so be it, as I said the establishment Media sure hasn't shown much propensity to do it.

Secondly I'm not advocating that anyone swipe the emails (or any other form of communications) from the common citizenry, heck we have the federal government doing that (thanks to people like Edward Snowden for letting the public know just how widespread it is), I'm advocating for what the stated mission of Wikileaks is; specifically getting the truth out about what our elected officials and government is really up to while protecting the sources.

Even if violating your rights results in a positive outcome, it is not justifiable to violate your rights. Once you start down that rabbit hole, you lose all semblance of freedom very rapidly. We must maintain respect for the rule of law and the constitution.

Again your rights are being violated by GOVERNMENT, I want the truth and specifics of that to see the light of day and I'm not concerned about the fact that it comes from "leaks" whether it be by "hackers" or anyone else.

The other aspect to this is what I mentioned before. Let's say the Wikileaks or Russians... whoever... had hacked emails and discovered something much more devastating and sinister... like the Clintons being involved in a child sex slave ring or something.... the kind of thing that would put them both in prison if it ever became public... but instead of releasing this info, the hackers blackmailed the Clintons into doing pretty much anything they wanted to keep it quiet? Would you be okay with that?

That's the price we pay not to mention there's nothing stopping that from happening anyways, the solution is for elected officials and those in power to refrain from carrying on nefarious nonsense behind the scenes and the ONLY way that's going to happen is if they're scared to death that their shenanigans will become public, they're not afraid of the common folk, they're not afraid of the establishment media and they're damn sure not afraid of the law.

Okay, I am not making an argument that hacking emails violates the 4th Amendment. That was someone else's argument. All the Bill of Rights outline limitations in government's power over us. However, the very nature of government is to protect the citizenry and uphold constitutional principles and values. So it IS a violation of the 4th for the government to condone such acts or fail to take action to prevent them.

It would be the same as saying it's perfectly okay for a private entity to confiscate your guns because they're not the government doing it. If the government fails to take action to prevent it they are complicit. So... No... you can't have anti-gun hoards running around breaking into homes to seize weapons while the government sits back and says... oh well? Not our problem!

As for "the price we pay" that's not an option for me. We don't condone foreign entities hacking private emails from the citizenry and political officials are still part of the citizenry... you do not sacrifice your rights when you become a public official.

Oh FFS. Why is it that the President doesn't get bent out of shape and expel diplomats when an old lady is scammed out of her life savings by a crook operating in Taiwan? Why is it that we hear about people humiliated when their phone is hacked, but the Government loses its mind when Jennifer Lawrence gets hacked. Oh no, pics of a star instead of a nobody are hacked, the FBI has to get involved.

Romanian hackers steal credit card information every single day. How many Romanian assets have been seized? How many Romanian diplomats have been kicked out of the country? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/13/credit-card-hacking-romania/4456491/

Now, it was a political figure. Oh we have to take action, they're people too. Really? Have we or anyone kicked Chinese out of the country for stealing designs of anything? Chinese copycat cars

If the Hillary campaign had been just like the rest of us, and entitled to the same protections we get, the FBI would have taken a report, filed it, and forgotten it. Because Hillary is not like the rest of us, Diplomats get sent home, assets get seized, and threats are issued.

The only people I believe less than cops, are politicians. It turns out I've had a good reason all along, because the Politicans were jerking our chains talking among themselves how they have to deal with the unwashed masses.

If Hillary was a regular person, this thread and the dozens of dozens just like it, would have gotten one or two replies and been forgotten. Because this shit happens every fucking day. When it's Mrs. Herbert Thumwalker of Omaha, the Government sighs and says how they would like to help, but they just can't. Sorry. When it's Jennifer Lawrence oh my how awful that the Stars get hacked like that. Mrs. Herbert Thumwalker of Omaha is a fool for clicking on a link. Podesta was a victim who was tricked.

If Hillary got the same protection as the rest of us, the story would have been forgotten by now.

We apparently have two entirely different issues here. I'm a Conservative, I didn't vote for Hillary, I don't support liberalism or socialism. I am not making ANY argument on behalf of Hillary Clinton or the DNC.

That said, I don't condone foreign entities hacking our emails... I don't care who's emails they are. I'm sorry if you think it's okay because in this instance it turned out politically well for "our side" but I still don't condone it on general principle.

That has nothing to do with the topic of the OP. The left is wanting desperately to promote a false narrative with this by implying the Russians hacked the election... they didn't hack the election. That's a lie. They avoid being called out by using little semantics tricks like "Russians influenced" and "Russians helped" or there was "Russian activity".... these are intentionally used to convey the false idea that the Russians hacked the election.

You want to venture off in the weeds with some alt-right boneheaded argument that it's perfectly fine for Assange and others to hack into our emails because they're revealing information Americans need to know. Then you want to rip into a "war on the establishment" tangent as justification for condoning espionage. I'm just not down with that. I'm sorry, my principles are getting in the way. I don't care what their purpose is or the results of what their hacking provides, I still don't condone it.

Now, what can be done about it? I don't know... I don't think you can just start kicking people out of the country who had nothing to do with it.... that seems a little extreme to me. Just as it's extreme to seize Taiwanese assets because some old lady's credit card was stolen. If you have evidence of a specific culprit and they have assets, fine... that's okay.... but you can't arbitrarily go around holding people accountable who aren't associated with the crime.

ONE thing that we can do is hold public officials accountable for properly handling electronic information which is vulnerable to cyber attack. If they are setting up private unsecured servers in their closets, we have to punish them for that. We can't just slap their wrist and move on. Our Espionage Act must be rigorously enforced and we have to be diligent in ensuring our government agencies and organizations have state-of-the-art cyber security. Beyond that, there's not much that can be done after the breach has occurred but we sure as hell shouldn't condone it!

My point is that it isn't being treated like any other hacking case. It just isn't. We don't get outraged when anyone else gets hacked. We shrug and say they should have selected a better password, or you should have been more careful.

Let's look at this a different way. Let's say you had some papers from work that were confidential. Let's say they were personnel records including social security numbers of employees. You put them in your briefcase or backpack and toss them into your car. On the way home, you leave them in the car and forget to lock the door as you go inside to pick up some groceries. You come out and realize that your briefcase is missing, and you report it to the police, your car was burglarized, and you tell the boss that you had the documents stolen.

You are liable. You failed to adequately secure the personal information of your employees. That someone wants to steal them, you are responsible for protecting the information. You can get your company sued, and chances are if they are sued, you're out of a job.

We have the same standards for secret information. You are responsible for securing the information. That someone wants the information is a given, and you get all sorts of briefings and information on what to be careful about.

Even your personal information and fun and games can be used. The Military is warning people about sextortation. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/05/09/navy-sees-increase-extortion-cases.html

I don't see any Diplomats being cast out over that. Apparently the lower enlisted ranks are unworthy of such outrage. Apparently the people who are being blackmailed over the Internet are not going to get the same levels of protection that her holiness Hillary deserves.

My point is that this hacking case is being blown out of proportion. Not over what was hacked, but because of who was hacked. If it had been anyone else, and it had made the news, it would be that you have to be careful, and here is our internet expert who will help you set a more difficult to hack password.

That's why I am laughing about this. Because now, a problem that has existed for decades is suddenly worthy of war. If anything it proves the gap between Us and Them. When we are the victims, that is just proof that we need to be more careful. When they are the victim, we need to launch a full scale retaliation against this horrific example of cybercrime.

I am a firm believer of a simple premise. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. If walls don't work to protect the nation, get rid of your walls Political types. Oh no, we have to protect them. The rest of us can go and pound sand.

No, I'm not saying everyone should have a private plane dedicated to them by the Air Force. But I am saying that if it is an act of war to hack Hillary's email, then it's a similar act of war to hack anyone's email. But do you think that Obama will be out there railing because I picked a bad password?

If the answer for the rest of us is to be more careful, use anti-virus software and select hard to hack passwords. Then the answer for Hillary is to do the same. Sauce for the Goose sir.

 

[Boss]

I don't think that should include breaking the law or violating constitutional rights to privacy of any American. I'm sorry.... I just can't go along with that. I understand your frustration.... sometimes our frustration overcomes our emotions and we react in ways we shouldn't.

First off, you have "violating the constitutional rights to privacy" wrong, the 4th Amendment applies to the U.S. government not individual citizens, someone (private citizen or foreign operative) copying your emails and releasing them to the public doesn't violate your constitutionally protected rights, secondly the law is just an opinion on a piece of paper, the fact of the matter is that it is our "law makers" that are violating laws, ethics and generally accepted morality and it's about time the public became aware of exactly what they've been up to, if that means some "hacker" copying their emails (or voice recording them or video taping them or whatever) and releasing them to the public then so be it, as I said the establishment Media sure hasn't shown much propensity to do it.

Secondly I'm not advocating that anyone swipe the emails (or any other form of communications) from the common citizenry, heck we have the federal government doing that (thanks to people like Edward Snowden for letting the public know just how widespread it is), I'm advocating for what the stated mission of Wikileaks is; specifically getting the truth out about what our elected officials and government is really up to while protecting the sources.

Even if violating your rights results in a positive outcome, it is not justifiable to violate your rights. Once you start down that rabbit hole, you lose all semblance of freedom very rapidly. We must maintain respect for the rule of law and the constitution.

Again your rights are being violated by GOVERNMENT, I want the truth and specifics of that to see the light of day and I'm not concerned about the fact that it comes from "leaks" whether it be by "hackers" or anyone else.

The other aspect to this is what I mentioned before. Let's say the Wikileaks or Russians... whoever... had hacked emails and discovered something much more devastating and sinister... like the Clintons being involved in a child sex slave ring or something.... the kind of thing that would put them both in prison if it ever became public... but instead of releasing this info, the hackers blackmailed the Clintons into doing pretty much anything they wanted to keep it quiet? Would you be okay with that?

That's the price we pay not to mention there's nothing stopping that from happening anyways, the solution is for elected officials and those in power to refrain from carrying on nefarious nonsense behind the scenes and the ONLY way that's going to happen is if they're scared to death that their shenanigans will become public, they're not afraid of the common folk, they're not afraid of the establishment media and they're damn sure not afraid of the law.

Okay, I am not making an argument that hacking emails violates the 4th Amendment. That was someone else's argument. All the Bill of Rights outline limitations in government's power over us. However, the very nature of government is to protect the citizenry and uphold constitutional principles and values. So it IS a violation of the 4th for the government to condone such acts or fail to take action to prevent them.

It would be the same as saying it's perfectly okay for a private entity to confiscate your guns because they're not the government doing it. If the government fails to take action to prevent it they are complicit. So... No... you can't have anti-gun hoards running around breaking into homes to seize weapons while the government sits back and says... oh well? Not our problem!

As for "the price we pay" that's not an option for me. We don't condone foreign entities hacking private emails from the citizenry and political officials are still part of the citizenry... you do not sacrifice your rights when you become a public official.

Oh FFS. Why is it that the President doesn't get bent out of shape and expel diplomats when an old lady is scammed out of her life savings by a crook operating in Taiwan? Why is it that we hear about people humiliated when their phone is hacked, but the Government loses its mind when Jennifer Lawrence gets hacked. Oh no, pics of a star instead of a nobody are hacked, the FBI has to get involved.

Romanian hackers steal credit card information every single day. How many Romanian assets have been seized? How many Romanian diplomats have been kicked out of the country? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/13/credit-card-hacking-romania/4456491/

Now, it was a political figure. Oh we have to take action, they're people too. Really? Have we or anyone kicked Chinese out of the country for stealing designs of anything? Chinese copycat cars

If the Hillary campaign had been just like the rest of us, and entitled to the same protections we get, the FBI would have taken a report, filed it, and forgotten it. Because Hillary is not like the rest of us, Diplomats get sent home, assets get seized, and threats are issued.

The only people I believe less than cops, are politicians. It turns out I've had a good reason all along, because the Politicans were jerking our chains talking among themselves how they have to deal with the unwashed masses.

If Hillary was a regular person, this thread and the dozens of dozens just like it, would have gotten one or two replies and been forgotten. Because this shit happens every fucking day. When it's Mrs. Herbert Thumwalker of Omaha, the Government sighs and says how they would like to help, but they just can't. Sorry. When it's Jennifer Lawrence oh my how awful that the Stars get hacked like that. Mrs. Herbert Thumwalker of Omaha is a fool for clicking on a link. Podesta was a victim who was tricked.

If Hillary got the same protection as the rest of us, the story would have been forgotten by now.

We apparently have two entirely different issues here. I'm a Conservative, I didn't vote for Hillary, I don't support liberalism or socialism. I am not making ANY argument on behalf of Hillary Clinton or the DNC.

That said, I don't condone foreign entities hacking our emails... I don't care who's emails they are. I'm sorry if you think it's okay because in this instance it turned out politically well for "our side" but I still don't condone it on general principle.

That has nothing to do with the topic of the OP. The left is wanting desperately to promote a false narrative with this by implying the Russians hacked the election... they didn't hack the election. That's a lie. They avoid being called out by using little semantics tricks like "Russians influenced" and "Russians helped" or there was "Russian activity".... these are intentionally used to convey the false idea that the Russians hacked the election.

You want to venture off in the weeds with some alt-right boneheaded argument that it's perfectly fine for Assange and others to hack into our emails because they're revealing information Americans need to know. Then you want to rip into a "war on the establishment" tangent as justification for condoning espionage. I'm just not down with that. I'm sorry, my principles are getting in the way. I don't care what their purpose is or the results of what their hacking provides, I still don't condone it.

Now, what can be done about it? I don't know... I don't think you can just start kicking people out of the country who had nothing to do with it.... that seems a little extreme to me. Just as it's extreme to seize Taiwanese assets because some old lady's credit card was stolen. If you have evidence of a specific culprit and they have assets, fine... that's okay.... but you can't arbitrarily go around holding people accountable who aren't associated with the crime.

ONE thing that we can do is hold public officials accountable for properly handling electronic information which is vulnerable to cyber attack. If they are setting up private unsecured servers in their closets, we have to punish them for that. We can't just slap their wrist and move on. Our Espionage Act must be rigorously enforced and we have to be diligent in ensuring our government agencies and organizations have state-of-the-art cyber security. Beyond that, there's not much that can be done after the breach has occurred but we sure as hell shouldn't condone it!

My point is that it isn't being treated like any other hacking case. It just isn't. We don't get outraged when anyone else gets hacked. We shrug and say they should have selected a better password, or you should have been more careful.

Let's look at this a different way. Let's say you had some papers from work that were confidential. Let's say they were personnel records including social security numbers of employees. You put them in your briefcase or backpack and toss them into your car. On the way home, you leave them in the car and forget to lock the door as you go inside to pick up some groceries. You come out and realize that your briefcase is missing, and you report it to the police, your car was burglarized, and you tell the boss that you had the documents stolen.

You are liable. You failed to adequately secure the personal information of your employees. That someone wants to steal them, you are responsible for protecting the information. You can get your company sued, and chances are if they are sued, you're out of a job.

We have the same standards for secret information. You are responsible for securing the information. That someone wants the information is a given, and you get all sorts of briefings and information on what to be careful about.

Even your personal information and fun and games can be used. The Military is warning people about sextortation. Navy Sees Increase in 'Sextortion' Cases | Military.com

I don't see any Diplomats being cast out over that. Apparently the lower enlisted ranks are unworthy of such outrage. Apparently the people who are being blackmailed over the Internet are not going to get the same levels of protection that her holiness Hillary deserves.

My point is that this hacking case is being blown out of proportion. Not over what was hacked, but because of who was hacked. If it had been anyone else, and it had made the news, it would be that you have to be careful, and here is our internet expert who will help you set a more difficult to hack password.

That's why I am laughing about this. Because now, a problem that has existed for decades is suddenly worthy of war. If anything it proves the gap between Us and Them. When we are the victims, that is just proof that we need to be more careful. When they are the victim, we need to launch a full scale retaliation against this horrific example of cybercrime.

I am a firm believer of a simple premise. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. If walls don't work to protect the nation, get rid of your walls Political types. Oh no, we have to protect them. The rest of us can go and pound sand.

No, I'm not saying everyone should have a private plane dedicated to them by the Air Force. But I am saying that if it is an act of war to hack Hillary's email, then it's a similar act of war to hack anyone's email. But do you think that Obama will be out there railing because I picked a bad password?

If the answer for the rest of us is to be more careful, use anti-virus software and select hard to hack passwords. Then the answer for Hillary is to do the same. Sauce for the Goose sir.

Again, I am not trying to excuse Hillary Clinton. This is the primary reason I had a serious problem with her unsecured servers and handling of classified information.

There is really not much we can do if a foreign entity hacks into our emails because they aren't subject to the jurisdiction of US law. But that doesn't mean we are to celebrate it and act like what they did was fucking heroic! It's wrong and bad when ANYONE'S email gets hacked... that has nothing to do with who's fault it was or who was liable.

You give a good example with the briefcase... well okay, was it ALRIGHT for someone to break into your car and steal your briefcase? Are they a hero for doing that? Should we applaud their efforts? Should we say, well, it's okay if they can get away with it because you should've kept it more secure? See... I have a real problem with the flaws of that principle.

 

[Boss]

My point is that it isn't being treated like any other hacking case.

The problem I am having is the false narrative the left is trying actively to promote, that the Russians hacked our elections. Forget about the goddamn emails! My OP is not about the hacking of the emails which is wrong and we should all condemn in no uncertain terms. This is about a false narrative that is MUCH MORE problematic and insidious. They are trying to promote the idea that our election system has been compromised by hackers and that's just not true by any means.

This is a clearly dangerous narrative to be promoting and the left needs to be called out on it. Stop LYING to people and implying the Russians tampered with the election results! That did not happen here!

 

[SavannahMann]

First off, you have "violating the constitutional rights to privacy" wrong, the 4th Amendment applies to the U.S. government not individual citizens, someone (private citizen or foreign operative) copying your emails and releasing them to the public doesn't violate your constitutionally protected rights, secondly the law is just an opinion on a piece of paper, the fact of the matter is that it is our "law makers" that are violating laws, ethics and generally accepted morality and it's about time the public became aware of exactly what they've been up to, if that means some "hacker" copying their emails (or voice recording them or video taping them or whatever) and releasing them to the public then so be it, as I said the establishment Media sure hasn't shown much propensity to do it.

Secondly I'm not advocating that anyone swipe the emails (or any other form of communications) from the common citizenry, heck we have the federal government doing that (thanks to people like Edward Snowden for letting the public know just how widespread it is), I'm advocating for what the stated mission of Wikileaks is; specifically getting the truth out about what our elected officials and government is really up to while protecting the sources.

Again your rights are being violated by GOVERNMENT, I want the truth and specifics of that to see the light of day and I'm not concerned about the fact that it comes from "leaks" whether it be by "hackers" or anyone else.

That's the price we pay not to mention there's nothing stopping that from happening anyways, the solution is for elected officials and those in power to refrain from carrying on nefarious nonsense behind the scenes and the ONLY way that's going to happen is if they're scared to death that their shenanigans will become public, they're not afraid of the common folk, they're not afraid of the establishment media and they're damn sure not afraid of the law.

Okay, I am not making an argument that hacking emails violates the 4th Amendment. That was someone else's argument. All the Bill of Rights outline limitations in government's power over us. However, the very nature of government is to protect the citizenry and uphold constitutional principles and values. So it IS a violation of the 4th for the government to condone such acts or fail to take action to prevent them.

It would be the same as saying it's perfectly okay for a private entity to confiscate your guns because they're not the government doing it. If the government fails to take action to prevent it they are complicit. So... No... you can't have anti-gun hoards running around breaking into homes to seize weapons while the government sits back and says... oh well? Not our problem!

As for "the price we pay" that's not an option for me. We don't condone foreign entities hacking private emails from the citizenry and political officials are still part of the citizenry... you do not sacrifice your rights when you become a public official.

Oh FFS. Why is it that the President doesn't get bent out of shape and expel diplomats when an old lady is scammed out of her life savings by a crook operating in Taiwan? Why is it that we hear about people humiliated when their phone is hacked, but the Government loses its mind when Jennifer Lawrence gets hacked. Oh no, pics of a star instead of a nobody are hacked, the FBI has to get involved.

Romanian hackers steal credit card information every single day. How many Romanian assets have been seized? How many Romanian diplomats have been kicked out of the country? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/13/credit-card-hacking-romania/4456491/

Now, it was a political figure. Oh we have to take action, they're people too. Really? Have we or anyone kicked Chinese out of the country for stealing designs of anything? Chinese copycat cars

If the Hillary campaign had been just like the rest of us, and entitled to the same protections we get, the FBI would have taken a report, filed it, and forgotten it. Because Hillary is not like the rest of us, Diplomats get sent home, assets get seized, and threats are issued.

The only people I believe less than cops, are politicians. It turns out I've had a good reason all along, because the Politicans were jerking our chains talking among themselves how they have to deal with the unwashed masses.

If Hillary was a regular person, this thread and the dozens of dozens just like it, would have gotten one or two replies and been forgotten. Because this shit happens every fucking day. When it's Mrs. Herbert Thumwalker of Omaha, the Government sighs and says how they would like to help, but they just can't. Sorry. When it's Jennifer Lawrence oh my how awful that the Stars get hacked like that. Mrs. Herbert Thumwalker of Omaha is a fool for clicking on a link. Podesta was a victim who was tricked.

If Hillary got the same protection as the rest of us, the story would have been forgotten by now.

We apparently have two entirely different issues here. I'm a Conservative, I didn't vote for Hillary, I don't support liberalism or socialism. I am not making ANY argument on behalf of Hillary Clinton or the DNC.

That said, I don't condone foreign entities hacking our emails... I don't care who's emails they are. I'm sorry if you think it's okay because in this instance it turned out politically well for "our side" but I still don't condone it on general principle.

That has nothing to do with the topic of the OP. The left is wanting desperately to promote a false narrative with this by implying the Russians hacked the election... they didn't hack the election. That's a lie. They avoid being called out by using little semantics tricks like "Russians influenced" and "Russians helped" or there was "Russian activity".... these are intentionally used to convey the false idea that the Russians hacked the election.

You want to venture off in the weeds with some alt-right boneheaded argument that it's perfectly fine for Assange and others to hack into our emails because they're revealing information Americans need to know. Then you want to rip into a "war on the establishment" tangent as justification for condoning espionage. I'm just not down with that. I'm sorry, my principles are getting in the way. I don't care what their purpose is or the results of what their hacking provides, I still don't condone it.

Now, what can be done about it? I don't know... I don't think you can just start kicking people out of the country who had nothing to do with it.... that seems a little extreme to me. Just as it's extreme to seize Taiwanese assets because some old lady's credit card was stolen. If you have evidence of a specific culprit and they have assets, fine... that's okay.... but you can't arbitrarily go around holding people accountable who aren't associated with the crime.

ONE thing that we can do is hold public officials accountable for properly handling electronic information which is vulnerable to cyber attack. If they are setting up private unsecured servers in their closets, we have to punish them for that. We can't just slap their wrist and move on. Our Espionage Act must be rigorously enforced and we have to be diligent in ensuring our government agencies and organizations have state-of-the-art cyber security. Beyond that, there's not much that can be done after the breach has occurred but we sure as hell shouldn't condone it!

My point is that it isn't being treated like any other hacking case. It just isn't. We don't get outraged when anyone else gets hacked. We shrug and say they should have selected a better password, or you should have been more careful.

Let's look at this a different way. Let's say you had some papers from work that were confidential. Let's say they were personnel records including social security numbers of employees. You put them in your briefcase or backpack and toss them into your car. On the way home, you leave them in the car and forget to lock the door as you go inside to pick up some groceries. You come out and realize that your briefcase is missing, and you report it to the police, your car was burglarized, and you tell the boss that you had the documents stolen.

You are liable. You failed to adequately secure the personal information of your employees. That someone wants to steal them, you are responsible for protecting the information. You can get your company sued, and chances are if they are sued, you're out of a job.

We have the same standards for secret information. You are responsible for securing the information. That someone wants the information is a given, and you get all sorts of briefings and information on what to be careful about.

Even your personal information and fun and games can be used. The Military is warning people about sextortation. Navy Sees Increase in 'Sextortion' Cases | Military.com

I don't see any Diplomats being cast out over that. Apparently the lower enlisted ranks are unworthy of such outrage. Apparently the people who are being blackmailed over the Internet are not going to get the same levels of protection that her holiness Hillary deserves.

My point is that this hacking case is being blown out of proportion. Not over what was hacked, but because of who was hacked. If it had been anyone else, and it had made the news, it would be that you have to be careful, and here is our internet expert who will help you set a more difficult to hack password.

That's why I am laughing about this. Because now, a problem that has existed for decades is suddenly worthy of war. If anything it proves the gap between Us and Them. When we are the victims, that is just proof that we need to be more careful. When they are the victim, we need to launch a full scale retaliation against this horrific example of cybercrime.

I am a firm believer of a simple premise. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. If walls don't work to protect the nation, get rid of your walls Political types. Oh no, we have to protect them. The rest of us can go and pound sand.

No, I'm not saying everyone should have a private plane dedicated to them by the Air Force. But I am saying that if it is an act of war to hack Hillary's email, then it's a similar act of war to hack anyone's email. But do you think that Obama will be out there railing because I picked a bad password?

If the answer for the rest of us is to be more careful, use anti-virus software and select hard to hack passwords. Then the answer for Hillary is to do the same. Sauce for the Goose sir.

Again, I am not trying to excuse Hillary Clinton. This is the primary reason I had a serious problem with her unsecured servers and handling of classified information.

There is really not much we can do if a foreign entity hacks into our emails because they aren't subject to the jurisdiction of US law. But that doesn't mean we are to celebrate it and act like what they did was fucking heroic! It's wrong and bad when ANYONE'S email gets hacked... that has nothing to do with who's fault it was or who was liable.

You give a good example with the briefcase... well okay, was it ALRIGHT for someone to break into your car and steal your briefcase? Are they a hero for doing that? Should we applaud their efforts? Should we say, well, it's okay if they can get away with it because you should've kept it more secure? See... I have a real problem with the flaws of that principle.

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

 

[Clementine]

What other options do the Dems have to explain the Beast's humiliating defeat? That she and her staff were complete sleazeballs? Come on!

 

[Boss]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

 

[LoneLaugher]

My point is that it isn't being treated like any other hacking case.

The problem I am having is the false narrative the left is trying actively to promote, that the Russians hacked our elections. Forget about the goddamn emails! My OP is not about the hacking of the emails which is wrong and we should all condemn in no uncertain terms. This is about a false narrative that is MUCH MORE problematic and insidious. They are trying to promote the idea that our election system has been compromised by hackers and that's just not true by any means.

This is a clearly dangerous narrative to be promoting and the left needs to be called out on it. Stop LYING to people and implying the Russians tampered with the election results! That did not happen here!

Yeah...and it has been explained to you that nobody is promoting that narrative. You can continue to be outraged by this without cause, if you like. But you are just whining about something that hasn't happened.

 

[imawhosure]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

You know, I believe a bunch of outcomes should happen from this fiasco----------->

1. If there is proof, Russia should pay a heavy price.

2. Because of what came out, the MSM involved with the DNC, AKA collusion; should be sanctioned, and the periodicals or the networks they worked for, should be sanctioned also. In other words........no access to the White House for 2 to 4yrs as punishment, no direct interviews, nothing. They abused freedom of the press, and should be punished, which is much worse than what Russia did because we expect that from Russia. What the MSM pulled of is akin to treason!

3. The DNC is a private entity. As far as I know, no real government action can be taken against them, unless of course we want to pull a far leftist trick, and claim the DNC pulled a hate crime off because Bernie was Jewish. Kinda hard to do though, when Debbie W. Shultz who devised most of the scheme, is Jewish also.

That being said--------> whatever the out come of this Russian investigation, we should all keep our powder dry until it dies down, and die down it will. Once that happens, make 200 threads on here, and constantly talk everywhere about what the MSM, and DNC collectively pulled off, which was akin to Nazi propaganda to get their girl elected. And then, in 2 nd sentence, remind everyone that were it NOT for an illegal action by the Russians we NEVER would have know, which is not a statement to OK Russias actions, but to show everyone how deep in collusion the MSM and DNC were, and what it took to actually bring it to light.

That should be a sign that there is a total LACK of transparency in our political process, and that the MSM as it is currently constituted is a large part of the problem, and NOT the solution! By the way, I don't know about you people, but I have cut off all subscriptions to newspapers, and periodicals. Want the problem to go away? PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS, or starve them, and they will change their tune somewhat. We have learned this by Chick Fil A, and Target. Target is ruing the day it went along with the far leftists, keep up the good work, stay the hell out of there!

 

[LoneLaugher]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

You know, I believe a bunch of outcomes should happen from this fiasco----------->

1. If there is proof, Russia should pay a heavy price.

2. Because of what came out, the MSM involved with the DNC, AKA collusion; should be sanctioned, and the periodicals or the networks they worked for, should be sanctioned also. In other words........no access to the White House for 2 to 4yrs as punishment, no direct interviews, nothing. They abused freedom of the press, and should be punished, which is much worse than what Russia did because we expect that from Russia. What the MSM pulled of is akin to treason!

3. The DNC is a private entity. As far as I know, no real government action can be taken against them, unless of course we want to pull a far leftist trick, and claim the DNC pulled a hate crime off because Bernie was Jewish. Kinda hard to do though, when Debbie W. Shultz who devised most of the scheme, is Jewish also.

That being said--------> whatever the out come of this Russian investigation, we should all keep our powder dry until it dies down, and die down it will. Once that happens, make 200 threads on here, and constantly talk everywhere about what the MSM, and DNC collectively pulled off, which was akin to Nazi propaganda to get their girl elected. And then, in 2 nd sentence, remind everyone that were it NOT for an illegal action by the Russians we NEVER would have know, which is not a statement to OK Russias actions, but to show everyone how deep in collusion the MSM and DNC were, and what it took to actually bring it to light.

That should be a sign that there is a total LACK of transparency in our political process, and that the MSM as it is currently constituted is a large part of the problem, and NOT the solution! By the way, I don't know about you people, but I have cut off all subscriptions to newspapers, and periodicals. Want the problem to go away? PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS, or starve them, and they will change their tune somewhat. We have learned this by Chick Fil A, and Target. Target is ruing the day it went along with the far leftists, keep up the good work, stay the hell out of there!

You are a nut.

The MSM reported every drip of info as it became known to them. They put Clinton on trial for 18 months.

Delusional. That's you.

 

[SavannahMann]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

Stuxnet was work of U.S. and Israeli experts, officials say

So are we the criminals? Are we going to demand that they stand trial now? Are we going to demand that the CIA and NSA turn over the people responsible? Are Charges forthcoming?

WE got what we have been doing for a long time. Squalling now just makes us look juvenile.

 

[SavannahMann]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

You know, I believe a bunch of outcomes should happen from this fiasco----------->

1. If there is proof, Russia should pay a heavy price.

2. Because of what came out, the MSM involved with the DNC, AKA collusion; should be sanctioned, and the periodicals or the networks they worked for, should be sanctioned also. In other words........no access to the White House for 2 to 4yrs as punishment, no direct interviews, nothing. They abused freedom of the press, and should be punished, which is much worse than what Russia did because we expect that from Russia. What the MSM pulled of is akin to treason!

3. The DNC is a private entity. As far as I know, no real government action can be taken against them, unless of course we want to pull a far leftist trick, and claim the DNC pulled a hate crime off because Bernie was Jewish. Kinda hard to do though, when Debbie W. Shultz who devised most of the scheme, is Jewish also.

That being said--------> whatever the out come of this Russian investigation, we should all keep our powder dry until it dies down, and die down it will. Once that happens, make 200 threads on here, and constantly talk everywhere about what the MSM, and DNC collectively pulled off, which was akin to Nazi propaganda to get their girl elected. And then, in 2 nd sentence, remind everyone that were it NOT for an illegal action by the Russians we NEVER would have know, which is not a statement to OK Russias actions, but to show everyone how deep in collusion the MSM and DNC were, and what it took to actually bring it to light.

That should be a sign that there is a total LACK of transparency in our political process, and that the MSM as it is currently constituted is a large part of the problem, and NOT the solution! By the way, I don't know about you people, but I have cut off all subscriptions to newspapers, and periodicals. Want the problem to go away? PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS, or starve them, and they will change their tune somewhat. We have learned this by Chick Fil A, and Target. Target is ruing the day it went along with the far leftists, keep up the good work, stay the hell out of there!

You are a nut.

The MSM reported every drip of info as it became known to them. They put Clinton on trial for 18 months.

Delusional. That's you.

The Clintons were embroiled in scandals during the entire time because of them. It wasn't one scandal, it was a series. First it was the email server in the bathroom. Then it was missing emails. The Wikileaks didn't start coming out regarding the hacked emails until July. That was the DNC emails that showed how Bernie was screwed during the primary.

The Podesta emails were released in October, the October Surprise.

Or do you mean all the emails that were released years later because Hillary had them on her bathroom server?

There were email stories during the entire campaign, but it wasn't one story of the Wikileaks. It was a series of stories because Hillary screwed the pooch on the server crap.

 

[LoneLaugher]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

You know, I believe a bunch of outcomes should happen from this fiasco----------->

1. If there is proof, Russia should pay a heavy price.

2. Because of what came out, the MSM involved with the DNC, AKA collusion; should be sanctioned, and the periodicals or the networks they worked for, should be sanctioned also. In other words........no access to the White House for 2 to 4yrs as punishment, no direct interviews, nothing. They abused freedom of the press, and should be punished, which is much worse than what Russia did because we expect that from Russia. What the MSM pulled of is akin to treason!

3. The DNC is a private entity. As far as I know, no real government action can be taken against them, unless of course we want to pull a far leftist trick, and claim the DNC pulled a hate crime off because Bernie was Jewish. Kinda hard to do though, when Debbie W. Shultz who devised most of the scheme, is Jewish also.

That being said--------> whatever the out come of this Russian investigation, we should all keep our powder dry until it dies down, and die down it will. Once that happens, make 200 threads on here, and constantly talk everywhere about what the MSM, and DNC collectively pulled off, which was akin to Nazi propaganda to get their girl elected. And then, in 2 nd sentence, remind everyone that were it NOT for an illegal action by the Russians we NEVER would have know, which is not a statement to OK Russias actions, but to show everyone how deep in collusion the MSM and DNC were, and what it took to actually bring it to light.

That should be a sign that there is a total LACK of transparency in our political process, and that the MSM as it is currently constituted is a large part of the problem, and NOT the solution! By the way, I don't know about you people, but I have cut off all subscriptions to newspapers, and periodicals. Want the problem to go away? PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS, or starve them, and they will change their tune somewhat. We have learned this by Chick Fil A, and Target. Target is ruing the day it went along with the far leftists, keep up the good work, stay the hell out of there!

You are a nut.

The MSM reported every drip of info as it became known to them. They put Clinton on trial for 18 months.

Delusional. That's you.

The Clintons were embroiled in scandals during the entire time because of them. It wasn't one scandal, it was a series. First it was the email server in the bathroom. Then it was missing emails. The Wikileaks didn't start coming out regarding the hacked emails until July. That was the DNC emails that showed how Bernie was screwed during the primary.

The Podesta emails were released in October, the October Surprise.

Or do you mean all the emails that were released years later because Hillary had them on her bathroom server?

There were email stories during the entire campaign, but it wasn't one story of the Wikileaks. It was a series of stories because Hillary screwed the pooch on the server crap.

Yeah. I know. And she still won the popular vote by almost 3 million.

The "scandals" you speak of were kept alive by the same media that nutbags claim tried to help her. The drumbeat helped enough undecideds throw up their arms and take a huge shit on the system.

 

[SavannahMann]

But the people in charge aren't discussing it as a matter of principle. They are demanding retaliation over the action. So it isn't what, it's who.

Back to the briefcase analogy. Let's say that instead of the personnel records we discussed earlier, you had evidence of a criminal act you were a participant of. We could use it as a real world example if you like. In New York during World War One, before the US joined in the war, we were tracking the German people who were active in sabotage and intelligence gathering. One German agent had a brief case full of files, and was riding the subway while a NYPD detective was tailing him. The German agent fell asleep, and woke as the Subway doors opened at the station he wanted to exit at. The man rushed off the train before the doors could close, and then realized a moment later he'd forgotten his briefcase.

The Detective had casually walked by and picked it up. Then he had walked to the far end of the train car, and stepped off as the German man had stepped on. The Detective walked to the street and boarded a trolley. Then he just went to the Police Headquarters and they translated the documents. No Fourth Amendment violation, he didn't seize the documents, he "found" them. He was heralded as a hero and his quick thinking was lauded and still is today. The German man was at fault for not securing his documents.

Those documents provided proof of German activity including bombing of cargo ships and bribes to cause labor troubles at the docks. German Diplomats were sent home because of the revelations of those documents. No one has ever said that the NYPD detective was in the wrong, no one on our side of the Atlantic anyway.

Why was the NYPD Detective a quick thinking brilliant fellow while the Hacker who got evidence of Democratic Party Corruption a bad guy?

Both of them have exposed corruption and in both cases evidence of the corruption was released to the people. In War One it was released to the people by giving it to the Press. Now, you have to go around the press if you want to get the truth out.

The NYPD Detective is considered a hero, and today the agents of the FBI and CIA are told to be watchful, if they see an opportunity to find evidence like that, take it. The Detective stole a briefcase, and is a hero. The Hacker stole emails, and is a criminal. Does that answer your question? Our definitions depends on who is doing the stealing, and who is getting it stolen from them. Our CIA doing the same thing to others, stealing information, well that's normal and good and we have to do it. Someone else does it to us, and well that's outrageous. What happened to us, is what we've been doing for a century.

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

You know, I believe a bunch of outcomes should happen from this fiasco----------->

1. If there is proof, Russia should pay a heavy price.

2. Because of what came out, the MSM involved with the DNC, AKA collusion; should be sanctioned, and the periodicals or the networks they worked for, should be sanctioned also. In other words........no access to the White House for 2 to 4yrs as punishment, no direct interviews, nothing. They abused freedom of the press, and should be punished, which is much worse than what Russia did because we expect that from Russia. What the MSM pulled of is akin to treason!

3. The DNC is a private entity. As far as I know, no real government action can be taken against them, unless of course we want to pull a far leftist trick, and claim the DNC pulled a hate crime off because Bernie was Jewish. Kinda hard to do though, when Debbie W. Shultz who devised most of the scheme, is Jewish also.

That being said--------> whatever the out come of this Russian investigation, we should all keep our powder dry until it dies down, and die down it will. Once that happens, make 200 threads on here, and constantly talk everywhere about what the MSM, and DNC collectively pulled off, which was akin to Nazi propaganda to get their girl elected. And then, in 2 nd sentence, remind everyone that were it NOT for an illegal action by the Russians we NEVER would have know, which is not a statement to OK Russias actions, but to show everyone how deep in collusion the MSM and DNC were, and what it took to actually bring it to light.

That should be a sign that there is a total LACK of transparency in our political process, and that the MSM as it is currently constituted is a large part of the problem, and NOT the solution! By the way, I don't know about you people, but I have cut off all subscriptions to newspapers, and periodicals. Want the problem to go away? PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS, or starve them, and they will change their tune somewhat. We have learned this by Chick Fil A, and Target. Target is ruing the day it went along with the far leftists, keep up the good work, stay the hell out of there!

You are a nut.

The MSM reported every drip of info as it became known to them. They put Clinton on trial for 18 months.

Delusional. That's you.

The Clintons were embroiled in scandals during the entire time because of them. It wasn't one scandal, it was a series. First it was the email server in the bathroom. Then it was missing emails. The Wikileaks didn't start coming out regarding the hacked emails until July. That was the DNC emails that showed how Bernie was screwed during the primary.

The Podesta emails were released in October, the October Surprise.

Or do you mean all the emails that were released years later because Hillary had them on her bathroom server?

There were email stories during the entire campaign, but it wasn't one story of the Wikileaks. It was a series of stories because Hillary screwed the pooch on the server crap.

Yeah. I know. And she still won the popular vote by almost 3 million.

The "scandals" you speak of were kept alive by the same media that nutbags claim tried to help her. The drumbeat helped enough undecideds throw up their arms and take a huge shit on the system.

Well as a Democrat who voted for the Democratic candidate in every election since 1988 I can say that none of that affected my vote. I had already decided that I would not vote for Hillary under any circumstances before she had announced. My reason? Hillary's own record. Her ineptitude and corruption go back until I had first heard of her, as the wife of a candidate. When she had started the response to women Bill had slept with known as managing the Bimbo Eruptions. Her involvement with the Travel Office, and every other scandal that has come along.

What it convinced me of was this. Hillary tries to be clever. But she is always just short of clever enough to pull her grand plans off. During the campaign, I regularly agreed with the Hillary Supporters that Trump could bumble us into WW III. However I explained, it is just as likely, if not more likely, that Hillary will get us into it trying to be clever again.

The only thing I could be sure that Hillary was in favor of, was winning. The only thing I was certain she was opposed to, was losing. Everything else was negotiable.

 

[Boss]

So are we the criminals? Are we going to demand that they stand trial now? Are we going to demand that the CIA and NSA turn over the people responsible? Are Charges forthcoming?

WE got what we have been doing for a long time. Squalling now just makes us look juvenile.

Well I am NOT squalling about anything, I am a raising a legitimate concern over a political party in America who is actively trying to destroy our election process by implying it has been compromised. You're off in the weeds talking about cyber-attacks and arguing the moral imperatives of it.

What our intelligence agencies are doing to thwart radical Muslims from developing nuclear weapons is a completely different subject. It doesn't have any relation whatsoever with leftists attempting to undermine our election system by promoting a dangerous and insidious false narrative. I can't seem to pull you back on the tracks... you just want to continue in the weeds talking about another subject. We really can't have a dialogue that way.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well I don't understand what you mean by the people in charge aren't discussing this as a matter of principle and are talking of retaliation. I don't pay much attention to the people in charge when it comes to my principles, and I don't know how you "retaliate" against an unknown cyber attacker. If you mean the dispelled Russian diplomats, I think that may be out of bounds unless they have proof these people were complicit in the hacking or handling of the hacked emails. If they helped facilitate this, then yeah... that's what we need to do. We don't need to declare it an "act of war" by Russia, that's way overboard.

As for your example, you are comparing apples and oranges. "If you see an opportunity" is FAR different than taking an action to make an opportunity through a criminal act. Breaking into someone's computer and stealing the information on it is no different than breaking into their home and stealing their television. Now, if someone leaves their television sitting at the end of their driveway, it's a different scenario entirely.

I don't switch my principles back and forth depending on who is doing the stealing and who is being stolen from, that's why my position on this is consistent. It's wrong for Russians or whoever to be hacking into American computers and stealing emails, I don't care WHO'S emails they are or what information is great and wonderful to have. Wrong is still wrong.

More disturbing to me is how some people are taking this anti-establishment position in defense of the hackers for political reasons while the Democrat Left is out there promoting a false narrative that the Russians hacked the election. Are you people just idiotically committed to defending this indefensible position while the left continues to promote a false narrative? I would rather condemn the indefensible and go after the left on the false narrative because that's MUCH more dangerous.

You know, I believe a bunch of outcomes should happen from this fiasco----------->

1. If there is proof, Russia should pay a heavy price.

2. Because of what came out, the MSM involved with the DNC, AKA collusion; should be sanctioned, and the periodicals or the networks they worked for, should be sanctioned also. In other words........no access to the White House for 2 to 4yrs as punishment, no direct interviews, nothing. They abused freedom of the press, and should be punished, which is much worse than what Russia did because we expect that from Russia. What the MSM pulled of is akin to treason!

3. The DNC is a private entity. As far as I know, no real government action can be taken against them, unless of course we want to pull a far leftist trick, and claim the DNC pulled a hate crime off because Bernie was Jewish. Kinda hard to do though, when Debbie W. Shultz who devised most of the scheme, is Jewish also.

That being said--------> whatever the out come of this Russian investigation, we should all keep our powder dry until it dies down, and die down it will. Once that happens, make 200 threads on here, and constantly talk everywhere about what the MSM, and DNC collectively pulled off, which was akin to Nazi propaganda to get their girl elected. And then, in 2 nd sentence, remind everyone that were it NOT for an illegal action by the Russians we NEVER would have know, which is not a statement to OK Russias actions, but to show everyone how deep in collusion the MSM and DNC were, and what it took to actually bring it to light.

That should be a sign that there is a total LACK of transparency in our political process, and that the MSM as it is currently constituted is a large part of the problem, and NOT the solution! By the way, I don't know about you people, but I have cut off all subscriptions to newspapers, and periodicals. Want the problem to go away? PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS, or starve them, and they will change their tune somewhat. We have learned this by Chick Fil A, and Target. Target is ruing the day it went along with the far leftists, keep up the good work, stay the hell out of there!

You are a nut.

The MSM reported every drip of info as it became known to them. They put Clinton on trial for 18 months.

Delusional. That's you.

The Clintons were embroiled in scandals during the entire time because of them. It wasn't one scandal, it was a series. First it was the email server in the bathroom. Then it was missing emails. The Wikileaks didn't start coming out regarding the hacked emails until July. That was the DNC emails that showed how Bernie was screwed during the primary.

The Podesta emails were released in October, the October Surprise.

Or do you mean all the emails that were released years later because Hillary had them on her bathroom server?

There were email stories during the entire campaign, but it wasn't one story of the Wikileaks. It was a series of stories because Hillary screwed the pooch on the server crap.

Yeah. I know. And she still won the popular vote by almost 3 million.

The "scandals" you speak of were kept alive by the same media that nutbags claim tried to help her. The drumbeat helped enough undecideds throw up their arms and take a huge shit on the system.

Well as a Democrat who voted for the Democratic candidate in every election since 1988 I can say that none of that affected my vote. I had already decided that I would not vote for Hillary under any circumstances before she had announced. My reason? Hillary's own record. Her ineptitude and corruption go back until I had first heard of her, as the wife of a candidate. When she had started the response to women Bill had slept with known as managing the Bimbo Eruptions. Her involvement with the Travel Office, and every other scandal that has come along.

What it convinced me of was this. Hillary tries to be clever. But she is always just short of clever enough to pull her grand plans off. During the campaign, I regularly agreed with the Hillary Supporters that Trump could bumble us into WW III. However I explained, it is just as likely, if not more likely, that Hillary will get us into it trying to be clever again.

The only thing I could be sure that Hillary was in favor of, was winning. The only thing I was certain she was opposed to, was losing. Everything else was negotiable.

Bless your heart.

 

[Boss]

And she still won the popular vote by almost 3 million.

Which is about a million less than she won California by.

 

[LoneLaugher]

And she still won the popular vote by almost 3 million.

Which is about a million less than she won California by.

And?

 

[Boss]

And?

So her final total was padded by the votes she got in California where Trump didn't bother to campaign because popular votes don't mean jack shit in a presidential election.

She didn't "WIN" anything other than California.

 

[SavannahMann]

So are we the criminals? Are we going to demand that they stand trial now? Are we going to demand that the CIA and NSA turn over the people responsible? Are Charges forthcoming?

WE got what we have been doing for a long time. Squalling now just makes us look juvenile.

Well I am NOT squalling about anything, I am a raising a legitimate concern over a political party in America who is actively trying to destroy our election process by implying it has been compromised. You're off in the weeds talking about cyber-attacks and arguing the moral imperatives of it.

What our intelligence agencies are doing to thwart radical Muslims from developing nuclear weapons is a completely different subject. It doesn't have any relation whatsoever with leftists attempting to undermine our election system by promoting a dangerous and insidious false narrative. I can't seem to pull you back on the tracks... you just want to continue in the weeds talking about another subject. We really can't have a dialogue that way.

How about DHS hacking the State of Georgia? U.S. elections are more vulnerable than ever to hacking

Any wild eyed Muslims in Georgia's State Computers that needed rooting out?

Look. It's like this. If you win five fights in school by kicking the other guy in the groin, you can't complain when you get kicked in the groin during fight six.

That's where we are. Our nation used all sorts of illegal and unethical things supposedly for the right reasons, but the ends never justify the means. We've interfered in 81 elections, that is the low estimate. The U.S. is no stranger to interfering in the elections of other countries

So what makes it right when we do it, and a crime against whatever when someone does it to us for a change? That's what I don't understand. I honestly don't get it. What makes it right when we do it, and a horrific crime up there with raping a group of Nun's when anyone else does it back?

Our nation was envisioned as a nation of laws. Laws that applied to everyone. Yet, we ignore laws regularly, and we can get away with it because we have the most military power. Might makes right? That isn't a governing principle. That's the battle cry of a bully. We want Assange extradited to us so we can try him for publishing the secret stuff he wasn't supposed to get. We won't extradite Robert Selden Lady to Italy. Robert Seldon Lady - Wikipedia

Lady was convicted of Kidnapping, one of those black ops where we grabbed a guy and stuck him into Rendition program prison. It turns out he wasn't guilty of anything but being a Muslim. Now, I'd bet money he'd be happy to give money or support to any Terrorist who might strike back at the folks who kidnapped him.

We break the rules, and we shrug it off when we get caught, or we get pissed at the person who tells we broke the rules. The rest of the world sees us as the bully, and they're right, we are. We're so strong that we can do anything we want, and nobody can stop us.

All I am doing in this email hacking thing, is applying the same sort of response we've given to everyone else whenever we get caught breaking the rules. Oh well, tough. You should have protected yourself better. Sucker. Because one of those guiding principles that I embrace is that sauce for the goose, is good for the gander. If you kick someone else in the groin at a high school fight, I am not going to think it's unfair when you get a boot to the balls.

 

[Boss]

So are we the criminals? Are we going to demand that they stand trial now? Are we going to demand that the CIA and NSA turn over the people responsible? Are Charges forthcoming?

WE got what we have been doing for a long time. Squalling now just makes us look juvenile.

Well I am NOT squalling about anything, I am a raising a legitimate concern over a political party in America who is actively trying to destroy our election process by implying it has been compromised. You're off in the weeds talking about cyber-attacks and arguing the moral imperatives of it.

What our intelligence agencies are doing to thwart radical Muslims from developing nuclear weapons is a completely different subject. It doesn't have any relation whatsoever with leftists attempting to undermine our election system by promoting a dangerous and insidious false narrative. I can't seem to pull you back on the tracks... you just want to continue in the weeds talking about another subject. We really can't have a dialogue that way.

How about DHS hacking the State of Georgia? U.S. elections are more vulnerable than ever to hacking

Any wild eyed Muslims in Georgia's State Computers that needed rooting out?

Look. It's like this. If you win five fights in school by kicking the other guy in the groin, you can't complain when you get kicked in the groin during fight six.

That's where we are. Our nation used all sorts of illegal and unethical things supposedly for the right reasons, but the ends never justify the means. We've interfered in 81 elections, that is the low estimate. The U.S. is no stranger to interfering in the elections of other countries

So what makes it right when we do it, and a crime against whatever when someone does it to us for a change? That's what I don't understand. I honestly don't get it. What makes it right when we do it, and a horrific crime up there with raping a group of Nun's when anyone else does it back?

Our nation was envisioned as a nation of laws. Laws that applied to everyone. Yet, we ignore laws regularly, and we can get away with it because we have the most military power. Might makes right? That isn't a governing principle. That's the battle cry of a bully. We want Assange extradited to us so we can try him for publishing the secret stuff he wasn't supposed to get. We won't extradite Robert Selden Lady to Italy. Robert Seldon Lady - Wikipedia

Lady was convicted of Kidnapping, one of those black ops where we grabbed a guy and stuck him into Rendition program prison. It turns out he wasn't guilty of anything but being a Muslim. Now, I'd bet money he'd be happy to give money or support to any Terrorist who might strike back at the folks who kidnapped him.

We break the rules, and we shrug it off when we get caught, or we get pissed at the person who tells we broke the rules. The rest of the world sees us as the bully, and they're right, we are. We're so strong that we can do anything we want, and nobody can stop us.

All I am doing in this email hacking thing, is applying the same sort of response we've given to everyone else whenever we get caught breaking the rules. Oh well, tough. You should have protected yourself better. Sucker. Because one of those guiding principles that I embrace is that sauce for the goose, is good for the gander. If you kick someone else in the groin at a high school fight, I am not going to think it's unfair when you get a boot to the balls.

Have you actually read the OP? I made the very clear point that "influencing" elections is a stupid and juvenile argument. All kinds of things influence elections and they are certainly influenced by foreign governments and agents. We do it, everybody does it. That's fair game.

Hacking into someones email is a crime in America. It's an invasion of their privacy and theft of their personal property. It should be condemned no matter who it happens to or for what reason. This doesn't have a damn thing to do with military and intelligence tactics used against foreign entities because they are not protected by US laws as US citizens.

Now here is what's happening... while you are worried about kicking people in the balls because you got kicked in the balls... some jerk is in the stands talking to your girlfriend, telling her you're gay and you suck dick! So what you need to do is wake the fuck up and pull your head out of your ass and take care of business. Stop arguing with me about the "rightness" of Assange hacking our goddamn emails and get ON these mutherfucking socialists who are out there spreading the lie that the Russians hacked our elections!

Sorry if I'm coming across a little terse but this is pissing me off... you alt-righties are acting like a bunch of retards and the left is acting like deranged madmen. Get your fucking priorities straight!