Russia's Influence On The American Election

JC29856

The latest intel report explosive findings are that RT is a media company that focuses on increased viewership and was negative towards Hilliary and historically has been negative towards the US!!!!

mrussel1

JC29856 said:

The latest intel report explosive findings are that RT is a media company that focuses on increased viewership and was negative towards Hilliary and historically has been negative towards the US!!!!

Yes that is breaking news.
But are you making the argument that the intel community is wrong on this, and the triumverate of Putin, Assange and Trump are right?

JC29856

Declassified intel report on Russia and the US election: "Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries."

Has Tim Kaine commented on this???

mrussel1

JC29856 said:

Declassified intel report on Russia and the US election: "Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries."

Has Tim Kaine commented on this???

How is that relevant at all. The question was not whether it was modified, it was whether the Russians conducted cyber espionage to influence the election. And that influence was in favor of one candidate.

Good news for you is that Tim Kaine lives 10 minutes from me. I'll go knock on his door and find out. This is a lucky break.

vaggar99

this guy seems to be a left wing conspiracy theorist, but offers some interesting ways that voting machines can be rigged and who might be doing it. interestingly, he never really mentions Russia.
codered2014.com/electronic-vote-fraud-q-a/

InHiding80

rgambs said:

jeffbr said:

Hopefully The Donald will appoint Baron Trump to be the Cyber Czar and make us safe from future attacks.

"So we have to get very, very tough on cyber and cyber warfare. It is a, it is a huge problem. I have a son. He's 10 years old. He has computers. He is so good with these computers, it's unbelievable. The security aspect of cyber is very, very tough. And maybe it's hardly do-able. But I will say, we are not doing the job we should be doing, but that's true throughout our whole governmental society. We have so many things that we have to do better, Lester and certainly cyber is one of them."

You couldn't make this shit up, it's just too dumb.

Make The Onion Reality Again.

InHiding80

JC29856 said:

Declassified intel report on Russia and the US election: "Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries."

Has Tim Kaine commented on this???

vaggar99

published nov 23,2016.
"
The activists, among them J Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Centre for Computer Security and Society and voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz, told the Clinton campaign they believe there is a questionable trend of the Democratic candidate performing worse in counties that relied on electronic voting machines compared to paper ballots and optical scanners, according to a "source briefed on the call".
"
telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/23/hillary-clintons-campaign-urged-computer-scientists-challenge/

PJfanwillneverleave1

https://youtube.com/watch?v=o8IUZ03Xqtc

BS44325

JC29856 said:

The latest intel report explosive findings are that RT is a media company that focuses on increased viewership and was negative towards Hilliary and historically has been negative towards the US!!!!

Don't forget that RT also backed Occupy Wall Street and the Anti-fracking movement. The report has essentially confirmed what conservatives have been saying about Russia/Soviet backing of the domestic left for years. Phony outrage.

JC29856

Is anyone clear on what exactly the Russians hacked? Who what did they hack?

JC29856

JC29856 said:

Anyone see the John harwood Twitter poll?

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/304686-campaign-collusion-is-cnbcs-john-harwood-too-close-to-the-clinton

JC29856

http://mediaroots.org/abby-martin-responds-to-exploitation-by-ny-times/

Ms Martin points out the NYTs bull poo article.

Now nyt correction hilariously disproves its point—"Putin propaganda" yet she denounced Russia on air, still had primetime show for 1yr

JC29856

Talking turkey!!!

"The same lesson in 2002 when a group of bipartisan senators assured the nation that the intelligence community convinced them that Saddam (Hussein) has weapons of mass destruction ... and the same lesson we learned in 2013, when, just months before the (Edward) Snowden reporting, James Clapper, Obama's top national security official, lied to the faces of the country when he said that he wants to assure everybody that the NSA doesn't collect data," he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reliable-cnntv/index.html?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

mrussel1

JC29856 said:

Talking turkey!!!

"The same lesson in 2002 when a group of bipartisan senators assured the nation that the intelligence community convinced them that Saddam (Hussein) has weapons of mass destruction ... and the same lesson we learned in 2013, when, just months before the (Edward) Snowden reporting, James Clapper, Obama's top national security official, lied to the faces of the country when he said that he wants to assure everybody that the NSA doesn't collect data," he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reliable-cnntv/index.html?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

Did we forget to mention the part that Greenwald has not seen the classified parts, whereas elected officials from both parties have? As of now, the only person I have seen dispute the conclusion is one person who benefited by it.
At this point you can choose to believe Trump and Putin, or the intelligence community and the rest of the oversight committees. Because you have zero way of proving your argument. Nor do I.

dignin

mrussel1 said:

JC29856 said:

Talking turkey!!!

"The same lesson in 2002 when a group of bipartisan senators assured the nation that the intelligence community convinced them that Saddam (Hussein) has weapons of mass destruction ... and the same lesson we learned in 2013, when, just months before the (Edward) Snowden reporting, James Clapper, Obama's top national security official, lied to the faces of the country when he said that he wants to assure everybody that the NSA doesn't collect data," he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reliable-cnntv/index.html?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

Did we forget to mention the part that Greenwald has not seen the classified parts, whereas elected officials from both parties have? As of now, the only person I have seen dispute the conclusion is one person who benefited by it.
At this point you can choose to believe Trump and Putin, or the intelligence community and the rest of the oversight committees. Because you have zero way of proving your argument. Nor do I.

Your critical thinking has no place in Trump's America.

JC29856

mrussel1 said:

JC29856 said:

Talking turkey!!!

"The same lesson in 2002 when a group of bipartisan senators assured the nation that the intelligence community convinced them that Saddam (Hussein) has weapons of mass destruction ... and the same lesson we learned in 2013, when, just months before the (Edward) Snowden reporting, James Clapper, Obama's top national security official, lied to the faces of the country when he said that he wants to assure everybody that the NSA doesn't collect data," he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reliable-cnntv/index.html?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

Did we forget to mention the part that Greenwald has not seen the classified parts, whereas elected officials from both parties have? As of now, the only person I have seen dispute the conclusion is one person who benefited by it.
At this point you can choose to believe Trump and Putin, or the intelligence community and the rest of the oversight committees. Because you have zero way of proving your argument. Nor do I.

My argument...GG suggests don't take the intelligence on face.
My argument is that I believe Assange who has been 100% truthful from jump unless you have information otherwise, over the US intelligence that frequently lies, even when it means killing innocent civilians and US troops.

Anyway, what exactly did Russia hack? Is that the classified info you are referring to?

Halifax2TheMax

JC29856 said:

Talking turkey!!!

"The same lesson in 2002 when a group of bipartisan senators assured the nation that the intelligence community convinced them that Saddam (Hussein) has weapons of mass destruction ... and the same lesson we learned in 2013, when, just months before the (Edward) Snowden reporting, James Clapper, Obama's top national security official, lied to the faces of the country when he said that he wants to assure everybody that the NSA doesn't collect data," he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reliable-cnntv/index.html?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

If the NSA doesn't collect data, what exactly do they collect? What an oversimplified version of outrage. But now that Julian Asstrange wants to track Twitter users it's all A Okay. Welcome to Trump's 1984.

JC29856

Is anyone clear on what exactly the Russians hacked? Who what did they hack?

Nobody wants to dig the devilish details?

mrussel1

JC29856 said:

mrussel1 said:

JC29856 said:

Talking turkey!!!

"The same lesson in 2002 when a group of bipartisan senators assured the nation that the intelligence community convinced them that Saddam (Hussein) has weapons of mass destruction ... and the same lesson we learned in 2013, when, just months before the (Edward) Snowden reporting, James Clapper, Obama's top national security official, lied to the faces of the country when he said that he wants to assure everybody that the NSA doesn't collect data," he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reliable-cnntv/index.html?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us

Did we forget to mention the part that Greenwald has not seen the classified parts, whereas elected officials from both parties have? As of now, the only person I have seen dispute the conclusion is one person who benefited by it.
At this point you can choose to believe Trump and Putin, or the intelligence community and the rest of the oversight committees. Because you have zero way of proving your argument. Nor do I.

My argument...GG suggests don't take the intelligence on face.
My argument is that I believe Assange who has been 100% truthful from jump unless you have information otherwise, over the US intelligence that frequently lies, even when it means killing innocent civilians and US troops.

Anyway, what exactly did Russia hack? Is that the classified info you are referring to?

"Don't take intelligence on face"... well that's great advice if any of us had access to it. Perhaps then we could critically analyze it. But we don't. And he doesn't.

Regarding Assange, according to the intelligence community the path from Russia to Assange was made deliberately multi-channel so he can make the denial he is making. I have no doubt he didn't get it straight from Russia. There was at least one intermediary. The guy needs a new benefactor and he found one.

Like I said, at this point you have to choose who you believe....and then you should sit under the blanket of protection of who you believe.

My semi-educated guess is that the evidence, the methodology, the code utilized to trace and decrypt, and the underlying details that led to the conclusion are going to be classified. Releasing the methodology would compromise future counter-intelligence estimates.

BTW - this is a dumb argument.