America's retaliation against Russian hacking.

Ducking the facts that this entire news story has legs and that Trump has been duped and used by Putin.
Oh boy are we gonna have a great leader. He doesnt even know when hes been screwed with.

The new GOP Mantra shall be,

DUHHHH

It should be impossible for those pumping up this matter to deny that there is a strong anti-Trump political component to it.

If we know that Russia was involved in the hacking of DNC and Podesta e-mail (as it appears we do) then retaliatory steps should be taken...and guess what? They already have been. What do the new Cold Warriors want? A military move? Our bringing down Russia's electrical grid? Something that will launch war?

There is no evidence that the Russians manipulated vote counts.

There is no evidence that Trump was in cahoots with them.

We didn't know that Putin's Russia still employed KGB tactics?

Where was the furor against China when it hacked into the federal government's personnel files? That is potentially a much greater threat that what the Russians are accused of with this election.

Clinton didn't lose because of the Russians. Trump didn't win because of the Russians, but these outcomes are what is driving this story.

I'm sure the CIA engages in attempts to influence elections in other countries. This doesn't mean we have to sit quietly and take it when it happens to us, but much of the outrage here is hypocritical.

Obama spent tax dollars attempting to influence an Israeli election. He made thinly veiled public threats to influence the Brexit vote, and if anyone doesn't think that Russia AKA the Soviet Union didn't do all they could to influence prior elections in favor of liberal candidates, they are nuts or dishonest.

We also learned that Russia has been disseminating disinformation about fracking which was picked up and used by eco activists opposing the process. That doesn't seem to bother liberals who would like to see fracking banned.

The Right's embrace of Julian Assange and it's largely tepid response to Russian hacking is politically motivated hypocrisy too, but it's not fanning a hysterical fire.

Fortunately this thing is going to eventually die, overtaken by other more important stories like mass shooting in US airports, and our shooting down a North Korean ICBM test. Meanwhile the faux outrage about big bad Putin and the hypocritical reverence for the CIA is stomach turning.

PDiddie says:
http://brainsandeggs.blogspot.com/

Last on the Russians
Hopefully the last, anyway.



If the report had explained how the Russians convinced Hillary Clinton not to campaign in Wisconsin (yes, that's Speaker Ryan with the sickest of burns), that they brainwashed her staff to order those buses of SEIU ground troops headed for Michigan to turn around and go back to Iowa, or show proof that Fancy Bear or Cozy Bear put DNC emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop (which prompted James Comey's letter), then I can be convinced.

But I couldn't find that in the report. Did I just miss it?

As I blogged on December 13, the Russians did something. But whatever they did had an indeterminable effect on the 2016 election, because the US intelligence officers who compiled the report did not go there. The report does say that.

“We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election,” the report stated.

If you don't want to accept that Clinton did it to herself, if you can't blame the polling that missed the mark, and if you think Comey was not at fault with his reopening and reclosing le' affaire email, then maybe you should just fall back to that old reliable, time-tested yet threadbare excuse: blaming the Green Party and Jill Stein.

House Democrats are calling for an independent investigation into the matter. I support that. "The Russians did it" is trying on the wardrobe of the JFK assassination conspiracy, so why not?

HRC, 0bama & the rest of the liberal progressive democrats have exhibited a total lack of common sense required to do the jobs Americans hired them to do, and it's pretty clear that the democrats are just as responsible for any hacking that may have occurred as the Russians are. So lets focus on the content of the hacked emails, and the evidence of wide spread corruption surrounding democrats.

It isnt just that mail was hqcked, IT WAS THEN ALTERED and truth was totally discarded.

The Constitution is silent on something like this.
1. The "president elect" was probably elected via a campaign of lies that created a layer of mistrust aginst HRC

2. Is this a "high crime or misdeameanor"? NO, if it can be shown that Trump was an unknoing beneficiary of the Russian campaign designed to accomplish the above

3. As is a FACT, The Dumoster is unfit for office. HEs an ADD idiot with all sorts of antisocial , mysogynistic traits. Hes scary.

4Clowns lik Fuggl qnd gunga are pawns of Russia. (Gunga may be on the job), I dont know about Fugg'l, he doesnt appear very smart from history of his posts.

WE DID??. I know for a fact the folks who did the post fracking pollution studies at PEnn State and U TExas. Are you calling these petroleum geologists and engineers PAwns of RUSSIA???

Im sorry, youve gotta do better at BS generation.

We did, but obviously you missed it.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/10/hillarys-leaked-speeches-confirm-russia-funded-anti-fracking-groups/

More of your half truth BS.

What half do you imagine is false?

I provided two sources. One leans left and the other leans right. There are quite a few more if you care to search for them.

Sorry if it doesn't fit your predetermined view about Russia, eco-warriors or fracking, but it's the case that Russia disseminated disinformation about the process that was jumped on and used by some anti-fracking groups.

It makes a lot more sense for them to do this than help Trump. Plentiful American oil, thanks to fracking, caused the price of oil to drop, and oil and gas are just about the only economic resource Russia has. They would love to see us energy dependent, but even more so for Europe to remain energy dependent upon Russia. Whether through their own fracking or by shifting their purchases to the US, Europe can greatly reduce the leverage Russia has on it. That would not make Putin happy. In this case the anti-fracking activists were truly Useful Idiots.

I believe you have no basia at all for that obviously false assertion. NOTHING has come from either John Podesta or the DNC to contest the text of ANY of the leaked e mails. They surely have the originals, and could easily do so. However, they have not done so. Even by the judicvial rules of evidence and inference this is considered an admission of the accuracy of the leaked material.

Careful Finn: geologists REALLY stick together in any dispute. I think it's 'cause nobody likes them (there's one under every rock).


... easy there farmer... just kidding.

I haven't read this whole thread, so these questions may have already been asked.

Was the pussy-grabbing Trump video true? Yes it was. Who leaked it? Has he been attacked by the media? Did they publish it? Sure, why shouldn't they? But was CNN trying to "interfere with the election" when they showed it?

Did they publish true DNC emails? Sure, as they should have. Were they trying to "interfere with the election" when they did?

How does "interference" even enter into the convo, that's what I'm wondering.

Is there supposed to by some requirement that the truth be suppressed, unless one is trying to "interfere" with the election, that it?

How has "democracy been undermined" by the Russians, or whoever got their hands on the truth?

It seems to me that CNN feeding debate questions to Clinton, or the DNC conspiring to defeat Bernie,(as exposed by the emails) are better candidates for any claims that democracy has been undermined and/or that a fair election has been "interfered with," know what I'm sayin?

All very good points.

I posted on another thread that it was common knowledge that expat Australian, Rupert Murdoch, has been using his media empire for almost three decades to influence the outcomes of elections, (not just in the USA) but nobody seemed to think that was out of the ordinary.

The Russian won this time, but I bet you that the next US president will be made in China.

This is the crux of the matter: If the leaked e-mail was unaltered and the content was sufficiently repugnant to have caused some voters to decide not to vote for HRC, how if this a bad thing for the country (Obviously it's a bad thing for Democrats)

It is a bad thing that Russians attempted to interfere with the election, but this doesn't render the truth as reflected in the leaked e-mail invalid. If the e-mail had revealed some truly heinous crimes (let's just say murder for the sake of discussion) would Democrats be arguing that the country would have been better off not knowing it and possibly electing a murderer as president? I'd like to think not and if it's the case then it's simply a matter of degree in terms of the objectionable behavior. There isn't a bright line that separates the truth about bad behavior from the truth about really bad behavior, and calls for merely bad behavior not to be known by American voters if the motives of those making it known are suspect.

It can at the same time be a good thing that this information became known and a bad thing that it was made known by our adversary.

Some Democrats are making the case that these leaked e-mail are the fruit of a poisonous tree and should never have been considered by voters, but that is a legal doctrine intended to bolster the premise of innocent until proven guilty. It's not one of the Ten Commandments or a Aristotelian tenet. HRC, despite what she may have thought, wasn't guaranteed the right to be president as you and I are guaranteed the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. In making our choice for our president, damning but truthful information need not be disregarded because it was obtained illegally.

While there have been claims of alteration, as georgeob1 has pointed out the DNC and Podesta have the means at their disposal to prove alterations occurred and they have not. Personally I'm a little surprised they didn't try to alter the originals themselves so that the leaked copies might be seen as altered, but given the lack of tech savvy that led to the hack perhaps they wisely thought better of such a stunt. Getting caught at something like that would have been a disaster for them.

It is a tried and true left-wing tactic to completely ignore the veracity of facts they dislike and instead divert attention from those facts by attacking the messenger. What else is new, eh?

Of course its as simple as all that. There was NO evidence of hacked mail being altered or clipped and spoon fed to the intermediates.
You dont seem to be denying it any longer, youve morphed your template to a "Well if it was sent it must be true" .

You kep baking urther into a corner.

QUESTION

If this whole thing is a factual report of recent incidents in which the Russian Govt had interefered with our election process, by clipping and altering communications, why do you support it??

Heh, Farmer, your "logic" here is laughable.

QUESTION

If you are beating your wife regularly, why should anyone approve of your actions?

as i understand it, Podesta and some dope of a IT guy hacked their own emails, they fell for a phishing scheme, people that stupid, or people who employ people that stupid shouldn't be in a position of power

all things being equal, people as stupid as Trump shouldn't be in positions of power either

in reality, people shouldn't be in positions of power period