The Hill: "still no evidence of Trump collusion"

[annabenedetti]

"hacked"? So, what polling stations, what machines what hanging chads did they tamper with?

There's a lot out there. This is from today.

Trump portrays the investigation as a partisan attack, but not all Republicans see it that way. This month, the Republicans and Democrats on the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee backed the findings of an assessment from U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia tried to interfere in the 2016 election and acted in favor of Trump and against his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.
As part of that effort, Russian hackers targeted at least 21 states ahead of the election and are believed to have breached the voter registration system in at least one, Illinois, investigators say. Without naming the state, Friday's indictment said the Russian intelligence officers stole information on about 500,000 voters from the website of one board of elections, a breach undetected for three weeks.




Really, do some investigating outside your usual sources.

 

[ok doser]

ok, so they stole information

what information?

what did they do with it?

 

[annabenedetti]

it still doesn't meet the classical definition of war

This is from 2014, and it's prophetic.

Putin’s Asymmetrical War on the West

By any reasonable measure, Russia is getting the best of the West in the showdown over Ukraine. President Vladimir Putin’s destabilization of that country continues apace while the United States and the Europeans are powerless to stop him, and all of this is happening despite the fact that by any reasonable measure Russia is weaker than the West. Its economy is much less developed and its armed forces are smaller, poorly equipped, and not as well trained.

In the grand scheme of things Putin should be cowering in his boots. Instead it is the West that is confused and divided. Why?

There are many familiar reasons, but put simply, Russia is different. It has a different culture and outlook and thus is willing to run risks that we in the West, with different values, are not willing to take. But that begs a larger question: Could it be that Putin has grasped the meaning of the strategic standoff with the West better than we have? Has he figured out an approach — do we dare call it a strategy? — that minimizes our strengths and his weaknesses to achieve his objectives?

I think he has. Whether it is written up in some grand strategy document, I seriously doubt. But whether playing the game by instinct or following some plan (in the end it really doesn’t matter which), Putin is taking a page from the doctrine of asymmetrical warfare. He’s minimizing his weaknesses while turning the strengths of his opponents against themselves. The aim is not merely to control Ukraine as much as possible but to force the West to accept new terms for the European order and for the international system at large. . . .

Putin has figured out how to turn the West’s purported greatest strength — its belief in democracy, peace, and a rules-based international system — against itself. America and the Europeans are rightly proud of their values and see themselves as models for the world. But when challenged by someone like Putin who disavows these values, Westerners — and Europeans in particular — are forced to choose between their model approach, which means intentionally eschewing the hard methods of the opponent, and the strategic approach, which may require tougher methods.

Putin is driving a wedge right in the heart of that dilemma. He seems to understand full well that the Americans and Europeans will always hold themselves back from tough measures, not only because they care less than he does about Ukraine, but also because they don’t seem to care as much as they claim about their celebrated values. In his mind if they really cared they would be forcefully defending them. After all that was what the West did during the Cold War when NATO even threatened nuclear war to defend freedom and democracy. Whatever you can say about NATO, that is definitely not the case today, and Putin knows it. He is effectively calling the West’s bluff.

What’s at stake here is more than the future of Ukraine. Putin’s larger goal appears to be to change the nature of the international system, particularly with respect to Europe. If he’s successful it will have exposed the hollowness of the Western model approach to international affairs. He also will have made the model of democracy appear morally corrupt. Ultimately what frightens Putin the most is the viability of that model for his rule at home. Striking a blow against its credibility is not only about international prestige and national pride but a cynical way to maintain his power base inside Russia.

If successful Putin will have succeeded in changing how Westerners view power and influence. The normal indices of national power — military and economic, for example — will have been shown to be far less important. Asymmetrical warfare will not be merely a thing waged by jihadists huddling in caves but by emerging great power leaders occupying palaces in Moscow and Beijing. That war will be fought at the strategic level, not to conquer one another’s territory or to destroy each other’s populations, but to alter the values and rules of the international system. All methods can and will be used (from cyber-warfare to "lawfare" to psychological warfare) in this type of conflict; the side that better understands the game will have the best chance of prevailing. . . .

But the ultimate question is whether Putin’s bet on the decadence of the West is correct. He’s assuming that we have lost faith in ourselves. He thinks that all our rhetoric about peace and democracy is hypocritical nonsense. He’s banking that if he decides to go further he can count on us making a mockery of our stated principles once again.

It’s time for the West to put its money where its mouth is. It needs not only tougher sanctions on Russia but to recommit itself to rebuilding the military defenses of the NATO alliance. It will take time to do this, and frankly NATO is now too weak to come directly to Ukraine’s aid. But something must be done for the long run in order to end this one-sided affair where only one sides gets to play the military game.​

and it's not anything we didn't do ourselves to other countries, without ever declaring war

What kind of an argument is that?

btw - define "hacked the election"

See my previous post.

 

[annabenedetti]

ok, so they stole information

what information?

what did they do with it?

WI, MI and PA: Trump won by a slim margin. Maybe just enough of a push in the right places? Who would know where to target? Who might have colluded?

 

[drbrumley]

There's a lot out there. This is from today.

Trump portrays the investigation as a partisan attack, but not all Republicans see it that way. This month, the Republicans and Democrats on the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee backed the findings of an assessment from U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia tried to interfere in the 2016 election and acted in favor of Trump and against his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.
As part of that effort, Russian hackers targeted at least 21 states ahead of the election and are believed to have breached the voter registration system in at least one, Illinois, investigators say. Without naming the state, Friday's indictment said the Russian intelligence officers stole information on about 500,000 voters from the website of one board of elections, a breach undetected for three weeks.




Really, do some investigating outside your usual sources.

Oh that's nice...same article..


"There's no evidence results were altered,"

So no, no votes were cast by the Russians, no votes were taken away by the Russians.


So really they don't know....it's just at this point in time, let's blame Russia

 

[drbrumley]

So what this boils down too, is you guys are upset Russia used social media to an advantage. To sway people for not voting for Hillary. In this regard, Russia is said to have "hacked" into the election.

Question becomes obvious: Was the leaked material true? And the answer is YES, yes it was.

No wonder why Hillary hates the Russians. She has always been a cold war warrior, ran her mouth and Putin slapped it shut.

 

[drbrumley]

So actually, they didn't do anything we haven't done and still do to this day. And you guys get upset because your guy was the target.

 

[annabenedetti]

Oh that's nice...same article..


"There's no evidence results were altered,"

So no, no votes were cast by the Russians, no votes were taken away by the Russians.

That we know of at this point.

But they hacked the DNC and stole emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump win the election. That's known. As well as with these latest indictments:

The new indictment, released July 13, 2018 by the U.S. government, now says that the conspirators hacked into accounts associated with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and covertly monitored the computers of dozens of DCCC and DNC employees, implanting malicious computer code and stealing emails.

One Russian unit stole information and the other disseminated the stolen information, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said in the press conference revealing the indictments. They used a scheme known as “spearfishing,” by tricking users into disclosing their passwords. They also hacked into networks and installed malicious software. They accessed information of a U.S. presidential candidate, a Congressional campaign committee, and a national political committee. They planted malicious computer code and stole emails and other documents.
​

Do you even care? Serious question. Do you care?

So really they don't know....it's just at this point in time, let's blame Russia

Do you really not see Russia's hand in the election? If not, then Putin really is an international puppet-master extraordinaire.

So what this boils down too, is you guys are upset Russia used social media to an advantage. To sway people for not voting for Hillary. In this regard, Russia is said to have "hacked" into the election.

Question becomes obvious: Was the leaked material true? And the answer is YES, yes it was.

No wonder why Hillary hates the Russians. She has always been a cold war warrior, ran her mouth and Putin slapped it shut.

So actually, they didn't do anything we haven't done and still do to this day. And you guys get upset because your guy was the target.

What "you guys" are you talking about? People on both sides of the aisle who care that the GOP doesn't care and may actively be covering for Trump?

What DO you care about, drbrumley?

And you too with the "well they do it!" defense. Sad...

 

[drbrumley]

That we know of at this point.

But they hacked the DNC and stole emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump win the election. That's known. As well as with these latest indictments:

The new indictment, released July 13, 2018 by the U.S. government, now says that the conspirators hacked into accounts associated with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and covertly monitored the computers of dozens of DCCC and DNC employees, implanting malicious computer code and stealing emails.

One Russian unit stole information and the other disseminated the stolen information, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said in the press conference revealing the indictments. They used a scheme known as “spearfishing,” by tricking users into disclosing their passwords. They also hacked into networks and installed malicious software. They accessed information of a U.S. presidential candidate, a Congressional campaign committee, and a national political committee. They planted malicious computer code and stole emails and other documents.
​

Do you even care? Serious question. Do you care?





Do you really not see Russia's hand in the election? If not, then Putin really is an international puppet-master extraordinaire.





What "you guys" are you talking about? People on both sides of the aisle who care that the GOP doesn't care and may actively be covering for Trump?

What DO you care about, drbrumley?

And you too with the "well they do it!" defense. Sad...

Was the leaked material true?

 

[annabenedetti]

Was the leaked material true?

I had some questions for you. I'm interested in your answers.

 

[Jonahdog]

Thank you, all you baby-killing leftwing imbeciles, for keeping my thread at the top.

Hmmmmm, "imbecile". a 3 syllable word. You are getting better

 

[Jonahdog]

ok, so they stole information

what information?

what did they do with it?

Patience, Grasshopper.

 

[Jonahdog]

Oh that's nice...same article..


"There's no evidence results were altered,"

So no, no votes were cast by the Russians, no votes were taken away by the Russians.


So really they don't know....it's just at this point in time, let's blame Russia

No blood, no foul? Is that it? Well that must be why Donny doesn't seem to care about it.

 

[annabenedetti]

In a July 27, 2016, speech, then-candidate Donald Trump called on Russian hackers to find emails from Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent in the U.S. presidential campaign.”Russia, if you’re listening,” Trump said, “I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”

Hours later, the Main Intelligence Directorate in Moscow appeared to heed the call — targeting Clinton’s personal office and hitting more than 70 other Clinton campaign accounts. That’s according to a grand jury indictment Friday charging 12 Russian military intelligence officers with hacking into the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party as part of a sweeping conspiracy by the Kremlin to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election.

The indictment says July 27 was the first time Clinton’s personal office was targeted.

 

[annabenedetti]

The hacked emails at the center of Mueller’s Russia investigation, explained

 

[ok doser]

[FONT=&]In a July 27, 2016, speech, then-candidate Donald Trump called on Russian hackers to find emails from Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent in the U.S. presidential campaign.”Russia, if you’re listening,” Trump said, “I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Hours later, the Main Intelligence Directorate in Moscow appeared to heed the call — targeting Clinton’s personal office and hitting more than 70 other Clinton campaign accounts. That’s according to a grand jury indictment Friday charging 12 Russian military intelligence officers with hacking into the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party as part of a sweeping conspiracy by the Kremlin to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&]The indictment says July 27 was the first time Clinton’s personal office was targeted.[/FONT]

1. in a public speech, trump calls on russia to hack hillary

2. russia hacks hillary

3. democrats and liberals are outraged that foreign nationals would interfere with a US election

 

[ok doser]

let's look at a different version:

1. in a public speech hillary calls upon julian assange and all his minions to hack trump's tax returns

2. the same day, assange and his minions hack trump's tax returns

3. democrats and liberals are outraged that foreign nationals would interfere with a US election

 

[ok doser]

WI, MI and PA: Trump won by a slim margin. Maybe just enough of a push in the right places? Who would know where to target? Who might have colluded?

what push?

what "right places"?


you're proposing this scenario where the russians have this hacked data and are able to use it to influence the election - explain to me a single possible detailed scenario where that would play out

 

[rexlunae]

let's look at a different version:

1. in a public speech hillary calls upon julian assange and all his minions to hack trump's tax returns

2. the same day, assange and his minions hack trump's tax returns

3. democrats and liberals are outraged that foreign nationals would interfere with a US election

So close, and yet, not quite what happened.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

still no evidence