world

Questions about election hacking swirl as Trump enters critical week

79 Comments
By JILL COLVIN and LAURIE KELLMAN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

79 Comments
Login to comment

Yet another reminder that Trump's entire campaign was an exercise in psychological projection: Trump repeatedly accused Hillary of things that he was actually guilty of- like racism, corruption, collusion with foreign governments etc. In fact, you could predict that every time Trump promises to do something that sounds ethical- like "drain the swamp"- he plans to do exactly the opposite.

9 ( +14 / -5 )

“He’s not denying that entities in Russia were behind this particular campaign,”

For those that lack a double digit IQ, "entities in Russia" does not necessarily mean the Russian government.

But watch as the AP simply applies the term "Russia", as if the country, the people and the government were all one indistinguishable entity.

-8 ( +8 / -16 )

@bbush "entities in Russia" does not necessarily mean the Russian government.

There are many ways to interpret that. Given the close ties between the Russian government and the Russian oligarchs, it may not explicitly mean 'the Russian government' but because the roles of government and the various oligarchs often overlap, I find it hard to separate them. And given that the pres-elect MIGHT owe millions to one of the oligarchs, the 'Russian government' claim doesn't seem too farfetched.

But watch as the AP simply applies

As you've pointed out, there are many ways to interpret what media say and why they said it, ranging from 'it's a plot and you're being manipulated' to stone cold truth.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

There are many ways to interpret that

Exactly. You are drawing your own conclusions and making connections where there are none.

There are 140 million people in Russia, not every single one reports directly to Vladimir Putin.

The AP is clearly using debased and vague language.

Mr. Priebus specifically said "entities in Russia", not the Russian government. As expected, the AP twisted his words.

If you're an English speaker and you cannot distinguish "entities in Russia" and the Russian government, then Mr. Trump is right in calling you a fool.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Maybe I should be thankful that the Democrats (and some of their Republican cohorts) have decided to go with the this Big Bad Russia meme. I don't see that selling well down the road. It reminds me of how China whips up anti-Japanese hysteria to help quite criticism at home.

When push comes to shove, I have to believe that most people are more concerned with their quality of life, and not the least bit interested in having a war. It's a pretty good indicator of how far down the rabbit hole someone is when they start talking about Russia "hacking the election."

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Oh, come on, Burning Bush - you know full well that "entities in Russia" must be sanctioned by the government, and any "entity in Russia" that runs afoul of Putin tends to find its members exiled, imprisoned, or dead

0 ( +7 / -7 )

@Burning Bush "The AP is clearly using debased and vague language."

It's a common practice of western media. When they say 'Russia' instead of 'Russian government' or 'Russian politicians' they force people to think that all Russians are foes of Americans.

"If you're an English speaker and you cannot distinguish "entities in Russia" and the Russian government, then Mr. Trump is right in calling you a fool."

True.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

@burning bush If you're an English speaker and you cannot distinguish "entities in Russia" and the Russian government, then Mr. Trump is right in calling you a fool.

Your knowledge of Russian institutions is superior to mine. Re language and meaning, modus vivendi.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

According to experts like John McAfee, there's no evidence that even shows Russians of any kind were involved. The hack the CIA cites was way too unsophisticated for the Russian government to use, even leaving an IP trail. And then there are others who have said the info was a leak, not a hack. But the corporate media dutifully ignores those people.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Over $6 billion was spent legally 'meddling' in the American election, with who knows how much more being spent on things (like hacking, creating and disseminating fake news) that can't be claimed on the tax forms. And that was just domestically. Add in the 'meddling' by pretty much every PM, President, and King weighing in (from the somewhat quiet to the out and out blatant) expressing their preferences (almost universally for Clinton) and even if you believe that Putin/Russia did everything they're accused of, you have to admit that it would have effectively zero role in the outcome of the election. Nor, given that it is the mere fact of Trump winning that has Americans and others doubting the legitimacy of American democracy, can that be laid at the door of the Kremlin.

And the hypocrisy of the American outrage over their election being 'meddled' with is, ironically, revealed in the 'report' when it talks about what might have motivated Putin to do this ('revenge' for the meddling in the recent Russian elections, overseen by Clinton herself).

Asia Times has an opinion piece about this, and the last two paragraphs are absolutely crushing in their summary of the American position.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Trump is more concerned about keeping the legitimacy of the election being unaided by the hackings, than getting to the bottom of this and finding the culprit.

It doesn't even have to be Russians. It could be the Chinese, North Korea, even ISIS. It could be some basement-dwelling hackers - it doesn't matter.

The culprit's identity doesn't matter because any culprit could potentially make people think that his election win was aided by the hackings. And that's what he's more concerned about, not identifying the culprit.

So the NSA, the FBI, the CIA, etc. could've pointed the finger to anybody else instead of Russians, and Trump would still deny it. Because the culprit doesn't matter to him - it's the legitimacy of the hacking effect itself.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

"Questions about election hacking swirl"? Nah! The only question that swirls is that: where the hell are all the facts that corroborate the story about the hacking? Nothing so far. Zero. It was entertaining so see Clapper answering questions, when he failed to produce anything beyond "believe" and "assume". If it were a usual criminal court the whole case would be thrown out immediately.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Priebus weighed in, saying Trump “is not denying that entities in Russia were behind this particular hacking campaign. I think he accepts the findings.”

"I think" is never a good sign of connection between a chief of staff and a president. Perhaps Preibus is left reading the same tea leaves as we. And it's the weekend - all could shift by Monday. This is the man who said his presidency would be "unpredictable," after all.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

If Mr Trump willing to give back the 'Throne' to Hillary?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Maybe I should be thankful that the Democrats (and some of their Republican cohorts) have decided to go with the this Big Bad Russia meme.

You're right, there's an entrenched vested interest in Congress that lives off the massive defence industry lobby.

They need to constantly beat the drum of big bad Russia coming to take your freedom away, that way they can continue to charge the American taxpayer billions, if not trillions in hugely expensive weapons systems that will never be used.

The defence lobby and the Congressman they support are the swamp that need to be drained.

Mr. Trump has picked a fight with some very powerful people in Washington, but he's a determined, almost stubborn man and he ran on platform of draining the swamp and I expect him to follow through.

Expect to see endless Putin scare stories during Trump's presidency as he begins to dismantle the entrenched Washington lobbies.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

It was entertaining so see Clapper answering questions, when he failed to produce anything beyond "believe" and "assume".

And don't forget this was the very same Clapper who flat out lied in front of congress when asked if the NSA was indeed spying monitoring US citizens' emails.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The scheme to blame Russia for US election hacking failed. It laid an egg. It made Washington’s intelligence community look like rank amateurs.

Americans overwhelmingly disbelieve its rubbish for good reason. With no evidence cited, it lacks credibility.

It’s fake news, fiction, not facts, propaganda aimed at delegitimizing Trump’s election and provocatively stoking confrontation with Russia. Fact: Russia didn’t hack or otherwise interfere in America’s election.

Fact: Obama lied like he always does. No US election hacking occurred - not by Russia or anyone else.

Fact: Information was leaked by one or more Democrat party insiders, angry about Hillary stealing, not winning, her nomination.

Senate Armed Services Committee chairman John McCain sounded buffoon-like, saying “(e)very American should be alarmed by Russia’s attack on our nation.”

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

@RichardPearce Well-written and incisive comment! I don't know why it's not getting more downvotes...

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

It’s fake news

Well no, at most it would be false information. The news is real - they are reporting on things that people are actually saying.

Fact: Obama lied like he always does.

That's not a fact. An opinion at best.

Fact: Information was leaked by one or more Democrat party insiders

And that's also not a fact. A hope/suspicion/fantasy at best.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

As little as a week ago Trump's die-hard internet supporters were absolutely adamant that it wasn't the Russians. Now He gets an intelligence briefing and has one of his surrogates change their language, and suddenly the die-hard internet supporters are absolutely adamant that it wasn't the Russian government, with not one jot of admission that they've completely changed their position. That's not quite Orwellian levels of double-think, but it's still quite scary.

commanteerJAN. 09, 2017 - 08:17AM JST Maybe I should be thankful that the Democrats (and some of their Republican cohorts) have decided to go with the this Big Bad Russia meme.

Why do you think it's a meme? Why is it unreasonable to think that if it seems likely that a government interfered in your country's election to misinform the public, that you should investigate that possibility and react accordingly? Instead of inventing conspiracies, why not imagine that people have rational reasons for doing what they do?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Any bored, basement-dwelling hobby hacker with an internet connection based either in Russia or anywhere in the world could have pulled this off.

The US "intelligence" assessment merely states that Putin seems to have a motive, so we're confident he did it.

Oh and by the way, we need Russia as an enemy to continue milking the American public with our trillion dollar arms industry.

Actually, that last part wasn't in the official report, I added that myself.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@forgetaboutit "The scheme to blame Russia for US election hacking failed. It laid an egg. It made Washington’s intelligence community look like rank amateurs."

Exactly. Rank amateurs or plain fools.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Questions are not swirling. Reading the headlines over the past week, I have read almost nothing at all on the topic.

And there was no "election hacking", as the election was not hacked. What was hacked was the DNC, and had the DNC not been a corrupt and dishonest organization hacking it wouldn't have caused any harm. Rather than blame the hackers, who did Americans a great service, the DNC needs to be blamed, and cleaned up. But as we all know, there is no cleanup in process, the same crooks will remain in the same position, and continue to be crooks.

Funny to see such an uproar over "fake news", yet those who decry it are the ones who are most likely to print it.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

I can't wait for his Twittwr account to be hacked.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Trump’s incoming chief of staff, Reince Priebus, said Sunday that Trump indeed has accepted that Russia was responsible for the hacking

Interesting. What Trump does next will go a long way in deciding how tough he will be on our enemies or if he rolls over.

I do feel bad for his supporters, tho. They are stuck wondering what Trump''s position will be. Do they blast Russia? Kiss Putin's rear? They haven't been told what their opinion should be so they are flying blind, hence no comments yet. Maybe say something about Obama in the meantime?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

it seems likely that a government interfered in your country's election to misinform the public

The "likely" part is still without any real evidence, which is remarkable considering NSA capabilities. So far as "misinformed," nobody on either side has yet claimed that the emails were false, which strongly suggests they are true. And if misinforming the public is a crime, the mass media, congress and the White House are among the biggest criminal organizations in the world.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

“He’s not denying that entities in Russia were behind this particular campaign,”

The Don, political messiah to both Russians and US rightwing reactionaries, is said (pinch of salt with anything he says) to have admitted the Russians were behind the campaign, but many of his followers still seem to have not accepted that.

Are we seeing Trump's true believers starting to question him, and instead are they now siding with Russia?

So many ways to interpret what's going on.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

And given that the pres-elect MIGHT owe millions to one of the oligarchs, the 'Russian government' claim doesn't seem too farfetched.

Oh, yeah, it does.

If you're an English speaker and you cannot distinguish "entities in Russia" and the Russian government, then Mr. Trump is right in calling you a fool.

That's a double BINGO!

Liberals are going to beat this issue to death like they did with the race card, you will be hearing this for years and years and in the end, it just comes to one thing, it makes Dems and libs look petty and like they ate a bunch of sour grapes. Trump is not stupid and he's not going to open his mouth and throw a hypothetical bone to the Democrats to carry on this charade, by saying what the left WANTS to hear regardless of what the possible facts might bear. If they can get Trump to unequivocally say, that the Russians DID influence the election and appear to know and or agree with it, liberals would feel to question the legitimacy of his presidency which is the bigger scheme of all of this and the man isn't going to do it and why should he? IF the facts don't completely support it. The left should carry on with their hypothetical conspiracy theories and running around wasting time and Trump should focus on his job and the country.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

I can't wait for his Twittwr account to be hacked.

It would be nice, but very unlikely. Twitter is pretty hard to hack.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

commanteerJAN. 09, 2017 - 10:33AM JST The "likely" part is still without any real evidence,

Don't confuse a lack of totally conclusive evidence with a lack of evidence entirely. There's sufficient evidence to justify further inquiry.

Let's not forget that the same people who are now saying we shouldn't even look into this overlap heavily with the people who demanded 33 Benghazi hearings and refused to accept the evidence-based outcome of every single one. But even one investigation into Russian election tampering is apparently too much.

So far as "misinformed," nobody on either side has yet claimed that the emails were false,

To this day, we still have people on this very board insisting that Hillary wanted to start a nuclear war with Putin, despite there being literally zero evidence to support that claim. The fear that Hillary would be a tough opponent was something frequently expressed in the Kremlin, but not an actual plank on Hillary's platform. That a large enough minority of the public bought it along with all the other lies about her that Trump could win the election is a serious concern - not for this election, but for the sustainability of democracy itself. When we enter a stage where facts simply don't matter to the public because the public has been trained to distrust the very institution of reporting whenever the reporters don't say what the public wants, that's not a momentary political issue, that's a societal crisis. You need to think bigger than just cheering for your guy. Your guy was championed by people who want to see democracy as an institution fall.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

There's sufficient evidence to justify further inquiry.

Sorry, but I just disagree. And added to that, there is an obvious political agenda to this "inquiry" that has nothing to do with hacking - which makes the whole thing suspect.

You need to think bigger than just cheering for your guy. Your guy was championed by people who want to see democracy as an institution fall.

I wouldn't call Trump "my guy." He was better than the alternative, but a far cry from who I would like to see. I don't know who these people who want to see democracy fail are. I am sure there were people who match that description championing both candidates. If you are worried about democracy, the neither Clinton nor Trump look to be very respectful of that - though Trump so far is better than Clinton in that regard. Also, if you are worried about democracy, you should be happy to see a reduced government and reduced surveillance of US citizens. Again, I doubt Trump will do much in that regard either - but Clinton certainly wouldn't have.

And I think facts do matter to the public - which is why there is such revulsion towards the corporate media and established politicians these days.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

There's sufficient evidence to justify further inquiry.

Sorry, but I just disagree. And added to that, there is an obvious political agenda to this "inquiry" that has nothing to do with hacking - which makes the whole thing suspect.

After 56 inquiries into Benghazi, I think it's time to return the favor now. Bring on multiple inquiries into Russian hacking!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Don't confuse a lack of totally conclusive evidence with a lack of evidence entirely. There's sufficient evidence to justify further inquiry.

I think their should be a further inquiry and then if the results are concrete beyond a shadow of a doubt, then what?

Let's not forget that the same people who are now saying we shouldn't even look into this overlap heavily with the people who demanded 33 Benghazi hearings and refused to accept the evidence-based outcome of every single one. But even one investigation into Russian election tampering is apparently too much.

Did anyone die? Unlike Benghazi where you had 4 people die unnecessarily and the White House trying to cover up the investigation and the president and Hillary refusing to meet with the families and, well, we all know how that turned out as a result. If it were ONE investigation, that would be fine, but liberals keep looking for something that isn't there. Even if Putin was heavily involved in the election process, it still wouldn't be enough to sway the election. People had their minds made up for a very long time about Obama, Hillary, the Democratic party and Trump. Hillary was completely naive to involve herself in the Russian 2011 elections against Putin, of course the guy has a grudge against Clinton and she thought she could take on a former KGB agent and he would just let that rest? If you follow the bread crumbs, this leads and goes all the way back to Hillary once again.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

I think their should be a further inquiry and then if the results are concrete beyond a shadow of a doubt, then what?

Then we do a Benghazi, and do another 45 investigations.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Then we do a Benghazi, and do another 45 investigations.

Good luck with that. With 12 more days to go, the clock is ticking... LOL

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

But the inquiries can continue for four more years!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The Democrats neglected to get a majority of Democrats elected in either house. So I don't know how this 'Benghazi payback' fantasy is going to go.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

bass4funkJAN. 09, 2017 - 11:21AM JST

People had their minds made up for a very long time about Obama, Hillary, the Democratic party and Trump.

That's right, and more of the people voted for Hillary than for Trump. But in the US system, as you keep pointing out, whatever the people had made their minds up about is irrelevant. You keep using this word "people" as if there's mass popular support for this incoming administration, when there just isn't. What you've got is a deeply unpopular new president with historically low approval ratings (around 43%, compared to Obama's 68% in 2009), who won on a technicality.

So any claim that Donald Trump has a mandate from the people is just laughable.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Trump wants to greatly boost military spending. The GOP controls the budget in Congress - this is a way to get them to go along with the budget hike.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Think about the degree of megalomania and prescience that the Americans are ascribing to Putin. First off, he would have had to be absolutely delusional to think that a small Russian operation would be able to discover something that the enormous Republican operation trying to dig up dirt on Hillary and the DNC wouldn't. Then, he'd have to be prescient enough to know that what was dug up would be enough to turn a Hillary slam dunk into a Trump upset win. It would take less of either for someone to decide they could rule the world with enough money, and then raise that money by buying hundreds of different lottery tickets all of which won the jackpot. And it is pretty easy to make a convincing case for something that didn't happen, the Innocence Project (an initiative that has freed a lot of convicts from death row by proving that they weren't the murderers of the people they were convicted of killing) documents how it happens, again and again. And that's in open court, where 'we have the smoking gun evidence, you're just not cleared to see it' isn't accepted as evidence.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Foston: ... a deeply unpopular new president ....

Foston: ... historically low approval ratings (around 43%, compared to Obama's 68% in 2009)

Say the same pollsters who said Hillary had a 95 percent chance of winning the election. Let's just believe everything they say, as a matter of faith.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRXaoD9IqWE

(Carrie Heffernan): Everybody loves everybody, nobody ever dies, the world is made of marshmallows, lalala

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

But the inquiries can continue for four more years!

They can and I personally hope the Dems exhaust themselves with this, let them focus on this and none of the issues, get bogged down and keeping their attention on Trump and nothing else, I sincerely hope so, it'll keep the GOP longer in power.

That's right, and more of the people voted for Hillary than for Trump.

Dude, keep yelling that it's ok, the clock is ticking. 12 more days to go.

But in the US system, as you keep pointing out, whatever the people had made their minds up about is irrelevant.

In the coastal States and in a different system we don't use, yes, it doesn't matter.

You keep using this word "people" as if there's mass popular support for this incoming administration, when there just isn't.

We don't need to hash this out again, even Democrats (the sensible ones) acknowledged that Hillary was a flawed candidate, she wasted her time in States she was already going to get like California or NY and didn't visit Wisconsin NOT once! She kept lying about her emails, servers, Benghazi, she had NO agenda, she was all around a horrible candidate, both new how the Electoral system works, they agreed to the terms, he won them, she didn't and that's it, even if you tally up the final counts, he still came out ahead. It's over, so what do you guys on the left think is going to happen? Some Wizard is going to cast a spell and put Hillary in Trump's place at the last moment? Buying time? Seriously, I wish y'all a lot of luck with that.

What you've got is a deeply unpopular new president with historically low approval ratings (around 43%, compared to Obama's 68% in 2009), who won on a technicality.

If if Hillary won, she would equally have been a very unpopular president, only one could win and she didn't. now let's move forward.

So any claim that Donald Trump has a mandate from the people is just laughable.

He's got the presidency, the House, the Senate, overseeing the next Supreme court judges (thankfully) so I would say, he does and there is nothing that the left can do about it, maybe in 8 years they can try. Good luck.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

When was hacking a privately owned server, unrelated to national defense, any concern for a government? The DNC hacks were NOT government systems.

I'm still confused.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

They can and I personally hope the Dems exhaust themselves with this, let them focus on this and none of the issues, get bogged down and keeping their attention on Trump and nothing else

Heh, so you want them to do the same thing that the Republicans just did for eight years!

We don't need to hash this out again, even Democrats (the sensible ones) acknowledged that Hillary was a flawed candidate, she wasted her time in States she was already going to get like California or NY and didn't visit Wisconsin NOT once!

And yet, even with that, the will of the people was for her to be president!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

When was hacking a privately owned server, unrelated to national defense, any concern for a government? The DNC hacks were NOT government systems.

I'm still confused.

As are many reasonable, level-headed people.

Long story short, the left suffered a devastating and unexpected loss and are desperate for an outlet for their frustration.

Enter the Russian hacking theory.

And any chance to whip up anti-Russian red under every bed hysteria translates to dollar signs for the Military Industrial complex, so they're on board as well.

Worry not, this hype will wither into forgotten irrelevance much like the issue of Obama's missing birth certificate.

Let the loser crybabies have their rant while the rest of the world moves forward.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Heh, so you want them to do the same thing that the Republicans just did for eight years!

I really don't care, if Democrats want to waste their time, please, go ahead. They are the minority everywhere, they can further marginalized themselves politically. In 8 years, let's see if Democrats can come up with something productive and beneficial for the American people, just for once.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Worry not, this hype will wither into forgotten irrelevance much like the issue of Obama's missing birth certificate.

Heh, we had a poster still bringing that up as of a few days ago. Trump himself was talking about it just a few months ago.

So it looks like you are predicting that this issue will go on for years to come.

I really don't care, if Democrats want to waste their time, please, go ahead.

Just like the Republicans did for the past 8 years?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

bass4funkJAN. 09, 2017 - 11:54AM JST

"That's right, and more of the people voted for Hillary than for Trump."

Dude, keep yelling that it's ok, the clock is ticking. 12 more days to go.

As long as you keep trying to make out that Trump was the people's choice, you're going to get told that's garbage.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

For people questioning the 240 year old Electoral College system, the founding fathers enshrined it into the Constitution for a reason.

The President is supposed to appeal to a broad range of American society, not just special interests concentrated in one area.

The UN works on a similar principle, giving small countries like New Zealand a voice, otherwise China and India would dominate everything.

Hillary ignored everyday hard working families, especially in the heartland, and she paid the price.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

They're probably following the protocol where they look at the level of sophistication, match it with that government's capabilities, then look at the political culture.

The analysts know the difference between a teenager in his basement and government supported espionage. The complexity of the attack and especially the detail in covering tracks goes a long way. If it's a high level attack then it usually follows that a government was involved.

But that doesn't always mean the guy at the top knew. You could have some department doing its own thing and getting away with some lower level hacks. This is where the politics comes in.

A hack this brazen has international consequences. People notice. Governments comment. If you are in Putin's government you aren't going to create an international incident without approval. It's the whole "Putin is a dictator and would make me vanish" thing. You'd clearly have to be insane to think a Russian cyber soldier took it upon himself to just hack the DNC and ship it to Wikileaks.

Do they have a video/audio recording of Putin ordering the attack? A memo outlining his plan? My guess is...no. But the conspiracy nutballs out there have tried and convicted people with far less evidence so I don't know why they think we need to answer to them.

Trump fans can respond if you want to, but remember, Trump hasn't released his position yet. What if you go one way and Trump goes the other? Will you be able to reverse your position fast enough? Best to sit right for now, maybe throw a few distractions out there.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

"as Trump enters critical week"

Yeah, it's crtical that Obama doesn't start any wars with Russia.

"I do feel bad for his supporters, tho. They are stuck wondering what Trump''s position will be. Do they blast Russia? Kiss Putin's rear?"

Neither one, Super, Trump's position will be peace through strength and don't start any wars with Russia.

Still waiting for any proof that the Russians gave Wikileaks the hacked DNC/Podesta emails. Please hurry!

I do feel bad for Hillary supporters, most of them are apparently still butthurt over Trump's election victory.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@Superlib

You seem to be alluding to some kind of conspiracy involving the Russian government, Wikileaks and Trump's team.

At the very least, your explanation relies on Putin, Assange and Trump all secretly working together, because they're all on the same page.

How would such a conspiracy be possible?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Heh, we had a poster still bringing that up as of a few days ago. Trump himself was talking about it just a few months ago.

I have said more than a million times, I thought the whole birther issue was a waste of time, I never believed it and for the life of me couldn't understand why the GOP and Trump wouldn't let it rest.

So it looks like you are predicting that this issue will go on for years to come.

I could care less, whatever makes the Dems happy, go for it. If the Dems care so much about it and would rather spend time on it than the people, whatever.....

As long as you keep trying to make out that Trump was the people's choice, you're going to get told that's garbage.

Slinging hash goes both ways, do remember that, please.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Have you said this on a forum other than JT? I recall your having said something different. Not a million times, perhaps, but at least dozens.

Sorry, I never believed that he wasn't an American, as far as his religious convictions flow, that's an entirely different debate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You seem to be alluding to some kind of conspiracy involving the Russian government, Wikileaks and Trump's team.

It's starting to look like Trump may be a Russian spy. I would like to have him prove he isn't, and can I be honest with you, I hope he can. Because if he can't, if he can't, if he is a Russian spy, which is a real possibility ... then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

There are much more important things that Trump and the USA must focus on. The elections are over. Such things cannot be used to change what happened, especially when there is no way hacking can influence an election by stealing information. Even if such information was stolen and released, such information if released only affects those who read it or heard of it. Such information is wanted and needed for making judgements. The information was proven to be detrimental to Hillary. It was not proven to be affecting the actual voting machines.

The only way to directly affect voting would have been to change the voting numbers. That did not happen. So why dwell on it?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Burning BushJAN. 09, 2017 - 01:01PM JST

For people questioning the 240 year old Electoral College system, the founding fathers enshrined it into the Constitution for a reason.

Did the Founding Fathers also stipulate that in each State the candidate who won should get all of the State's Electoral College votes?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

It's starting to look like Trump may be a Russian spy

I've also heard him described as a neo-Manchurian candidate, plus have read he's a sleeper agent. Given his very limited vocabulary and how often he repeats himself, you do have to wonder if he's been hypnotized.

The youtubes that claim he's an alien are hard to believe, but you never know. I've never seen any human with hair like his, so there's that possibility.

So many things for him to prove.

Actually I'd ignore all of the rumors that are circulating if he'd just release his tax info.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

From what I'm hearing in the news... it wasn't really a hack so much as it was an "influence" and "propagandize" campaign US citizens against Hillary.

And it worked like a dream for them because of the idiot partisan fanbase that treats our country like a football game. The Republican fanboys ate it up as much rhetoric that was puked out, and regurgitated it amongst themselves. The straight Democrat fanboys were so busy pushing their agenda for Hillary that they didn't really help themselves. As an unaffiliated moderate/independent voter I think it would be apt if both party followers just painted their faces like sports fanatics and just yell and scream at each other.

It showed just how divided our country has become based on plain old misguided politicking. And all Russia's intelligence organizations had to do was just whisper in the GOP fan bases ears and like the useful mice they were, they liked the cheddar that was being fed to them.

Remember, Putin plays chess.... the GOP fanboys are playing tiddly-winks. Y'all got played like the suckers you were. But you won't realize it until its too late.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Did the Founding Fathers also stipulate that in each State the candidate who won should get all of the State's Electoral College votes?

Give it a rest, it's over. 15 more days left.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The analysts know the difference between a teenager in his basement and government supported espionage. The complexity of the attack and especially the detail in covering tracks goes a long way.

Well, if you know anything about these hacks, you know they were not complex and that there was little to no effort made to cover tracks. Hence, by your own, standards, it was most likely a teenager in his basement. Glad we can agree on this.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

if you know anything about these hacks, you know they were not complex and that there was little to no effort made to cover tracks.

But I thought they were using TOR - that's an effort to cover their tracks, and a pretty good effort at that.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

It's starting to look like Trump may be a Russian spy. I would like to have him prove he isn't

Oh boy, here we go with the outlandish conspiracy stuff.

May I ask a down to earth question?

How does one prove they are not a spy?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

How does one prove they are not a spy?

It's hard to do, I'm sure. It would probably take someone with the experience of a Rick Deckard or Bob Arctor to figure out.

Another question is how can it be proved someone is or is not a paid cybertroll in the employ of a state run media or an organization like Nashi. On the Internet, anything is possible, you know.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

It's starting to look like Trump may be a Russian spy. I would like to have him prove he isn't, and can I be honest with you, I hope he can. Because if he can't, if he can't, if he is a Russian spy, which is a real possibility ... then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics.

Oh boy, here we go with the outlandish conspiracy stuff.

Maybe you'd prefer the original quote:

"I would like to have him show his birth certificate, and can I be honest with you, I hope he can. Because if he can't, if he can't, if he wasn't born in this country, which is a real possibility ... then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics."

I wonder who said that, about who. Hmm?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

All conspiracy theories floating around once again...

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Hey if trump doesn't believe it then it didn't happen :-/

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"Did the Founding Fathers also stipulate that in each State the candidate who won should get all of the State's Electoral College votes?"

No, but Hillary got all 55 of California's electoral votes and STILL LOST the electon. Go figure.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

No, but Hillary got all 55 of California's electoral votes and STILL LOST the electon. Go figure.

She got 3 million more votes and STILL LOST the election. Go figure.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

and STILL LOST the election. Go figure.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Let me put it in simple terms for blind faith GOP and Trump supporters. Russian intelligence has just shown the rest of the world and other hostile governments how to control you. All they need is to help push you in a direction that you'll be gullible enough to agree with, and you'll run the rest of the way on your own. Psychological manipulation is harder when people actually use their brains more.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Strangerland: But I thought they were using TOR - that's an effort to cover their tracks, and a pretty good effort at that.

A good effort for the average home user, maybe. But for a hacker?

TOR's freely available. I haven't tried it, but for an admin , or for an amateur hacker who spends a lot of time on this stuff, I don't see how it would be difficult, and therefore don't see how it's an indicator of a state-directed effort vs. an amateur effort.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Well obviously I was speaking in general terms since I don't have access to classified information.

In the end it doeamt matter. Trump and some members of Congress have the info. If Trump fails to act, Congress will. No amount of debates on message boards can change that.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Since my access to Government information is limited to what the media reports, and since my trust in U.S. media is not very high...

Perhaps, those on here with a high enough security clearance to know exactly what happened will chime in?

What was "hacked'?

What was done with this information?

If, "fake news" stories were sufficient to sway voters, are not the voters to blame for being so easily swayed?

What evidence is there that voters were swayed by the Russian government?
0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Trump fails to act, Congress will.

Yawn.

Trump's Executive Orders can squash anything Congress attempts to do.

Quite the democracy eh.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

What was "hacked'?

The Democratic National Committee’s email server.

What was done with this information?

It was leaked to Julian Assange who subsequently released it through his Wikileaks website.

If, "fake news" stories were sufficient to sway voters, are not the voters to blame for being so easily swayed?

If in fact, the American electorate was sufficiently influenced by these revelations to change the outcome of the General election, then they deserve all the blame that can be heaped on them. But… I don’t think that’s the case.

I don’t think that finding out that the Democratic National Committee favored Hillary over Bernie or finding out that they were in bed with certain media outlets had any more effect on the final tally than “grab her by the pussy” did. I don’t think too many people were surprised or outraged by what was revealed. Well, maybe some Sanders supporters.

What evidence is there that voters were swayed by the Russian government?

There’s evidence that the Russians were behind the hack, but how that influenced the vote is all conjecture.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Trump's Russian reset will work a lot better than Obama and Hillary's reset

Liberals outraged over Trump's Russian 'reset' plan :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a2Y56OpdEQ

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

mt9334: Perhaps, those on here with a high enough security clearance to know exactly what happened will chime in?

Everyone that matches that description, with the sole exception of Hillary Rodham Clinton (unless she perjured herself), has had training telling them to not tell you that stuff. Apparently she got a bye on that: https://www.google.com/#q=hillary+clinton+security+training (lots of headlines including "SHOCK: Hillary never took mandatory security training on classif" and "Army pulls training slide that named Clinton as 'threat' - CNNPoli".

So you may want to ask Hillary: https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton

If, "fake news" stories were sufficient to sway voters, are not the voters to blame for being so easily swayed?

Apparently fake news is OK if NYT and WaPo do it. And astroturfing is apparently OK if the DNC's astroturf (organization? PAC?) Correct The Record does it.

It's also apparently OK if the DNC refuses access to their servers to the FBI, forcing the FBI to rely on the DNC's own analysts obtained for that purpose, analysts from a company funded by Eric Schmidt, a Google cofounder (or almost a cofounder), who happened also to be a lead executive (and or co/founder) of an external IT organization (a PAC?) supplying services and advice to help Hillary get elected.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Kuya 808,

You wrote, "There’s evidence that the Russians were behind the hack, but how that influenced the vote is all conjecture."

Well said.

Now, then...if conjecture is behind how the hack influenced the election...then there is no rational grounding as to if the election was influenced at all.

Seems to me, the U.S. media has implied that because of the Russian hack, Trump is now President, is that not your impression as well?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites