Slashdot Mirror
Trump Calls For Russia To Cyber-Invade the United States To Find Clinton's 'Missing' Emails (gawker.com)
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump publicly called on the Russian hackers allegedly responsible for the recent leak of DNC emails to launch another cyber-attack on the United States, this time to hack emails from Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of State, according to reporters who attended the press conference Wednesday. (Alternate source: NYTimes, Quartz, and MotherJones) "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump said. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."
Clinton came under investigation for her use of a personal email address while serving as secretary of state. After turning over to the FBI all correspondence about government business during her years in the State Department, Clinton revealed at a press conference last year that she had deleted about half of her emails that pertained to personal matters, like her daughter's wedding. Attorney General Loretta Lynch ultimately decided not to pursue criminal charges against Clinton. Update: Here's a video of Trump saying that.
Clinton came under investigation for her use of a personal email address while serving as secretary of state. After turning over to the FBI all correspondence about government business during her years in the State Department, Clinton revealed at a press conference last year that she had deleted about half of her emails that pertained to personal matters, like her daughter's wedding. Attorney General Loretta Lynch ultimately decided not to pursue criminal charges against Clinton. Update: Here's a video of Trump saying that.
should hacked also to obtain trump irs statements
It's called "news". It's this thing where someone tells everybody facts about events that are occurring.
Story where she took bribes from Russia to approve the sale of 1/5 of US uranium to them.
So much for lack of factual support. Perhaps if you spent a minute looking you would have seen this, or the university thing where she took $16.5 million of taxpayer money for herself.
But nothing she sent on that server was classified, right?
I mean, classified at the time, riight?
I mean, marked classified at the time, riiight?!?!?
So you don't think the Republican candidate for the Presidency of the US inviting a foreign power, one that is at the best of times in a rather tense relationship with the United States, to hack into US systems just to gain dirt on the other party's nominee is reasonable?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Trump makes a lot of absurd comments. Can someone explain to me how you filter them in to "Serious Proposals" and "Jokes"?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I don't know; he's better than people who start their comments in the subject line...
-SaNo
Sounds like a form of Treason if true. Inviting a foreign nation tho cyber-attack America and/or Americans... can;t believe people actually are willing to vote for this piece of garbage
C'mon Anonymous, C'mon Putin, get us those Trump IRS returns and show the world that TRUMP is all smoke and mirrors
Yes. Not content to jump the shark, The Donald (otherwise known as the Insane Clown and his Posse) now insists on being jumped by a shark instead, because, in Soviet Russia, shark jumps you.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
An NBC reporter tried to press him for details about his statements during this press conference, and was told to "be quiet" when she tried to catch him dodging the question. The response from Trump supporters? She was "rude," referring to her as part of the "bully media," and that she was "yakking on." He's taken time out to call a reporter "sleaze." When a reporter pressed him on not following through with his promise to donate to vets he responded by calling the reporter "a nasty guy." Or remember Jorge Ramos? Trump told him to "sit down" and ejected him from a press conference.
Trump's supporters eat this up and heap praise upon him for "standing up to the media." As President that wouldn't change, and I'm sure he'd have press credentials revoked on a regular basis.
Rawr
It sounds like the subtext here is that "Hillary claims to have lost them, then maybe the Russians can find them." Seems like more of a poke at Hillary and the administration than a truly-meant invitation to cybercrime.
But when Trump talks, you never know what to expect or what it means, if anything.
Trump uses a very simple strategy - make no comments that CAN NOT be claimed to be an obvious joke. Then get all upset when people take you seriously. Whether he is talking about immigrants, women, Muslims, disabled, or pretty much anything.
The fact that you think this is a valid political strategy reflects poorly on YOU as much as it reflects poorly on
Anyone running for president has NO BUSINESS making jokes about other countries engaging in acts of War against this country. That's the equivalent of making a joke about having a bomb while in line at the TSA. When they take you seriously, you deserve NO sympathy.
But I do agree that Gawker is crap, and poor crap at that. At the very least we need should insist on a higher quality crap being spoon fed to the masses.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
He's also said he wants to change libel laws so that he can sue reporters who say bad things about him - even if those things are true. So if President Trump would have his way, press reporting on him negatively could first get their credentials revoked and then wind up being sued into oblivion. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if, after the election if he wins it, he declares that criticizing the President was grounds to be tried for treason.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
This is one of the most dangerous things about Trump. He says a ton of things. His supporters filter out the things they don't like and just say "Oh, he was joking. He doesn't really believe that." You can pick and choose from Trump's statements and pretty much build your ideal candidate no matter what your political views if you're right of center. However, the stuff that gets ignored as "That's just Trump being Trump" isn't throwaway material. It's a pattern of reckless speech at best and advocating some really scary proposals at worst.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Actually, I think the responses to Trump's comments actually need a "woosh".
He's being unpresidential, but what he's really saying is that: maybe those emails aren't as lost as they would like everyone to believe. Which is to say that if people with the right skills, an inability to be arrested by the government, and a lack of interest in keeping Hillary out of trouble were looking, perhaps they would magically appear.
Just like: maybe the Democratic National Committee wasn't quite as unbiased as they said they were, but no one could prove that... until they could.
Many people think that Russia putting up Edward Snowden is helping out someone who helped America. Do those same people believe Snowden is a traitor for making use of Russia's good graces? Does anyone believe Russia is doing it to help out the cause of civil rights in America?
Of course they're not in it to help us out, but perhaps they might be helping out America in the long term by helping someone who dropped some short term troubles on us.
In this case, calling Trump a "traitor" is missing the point, since I imagine many, if not most of the people calling him a traitor think that Edward Snowden is a great guy. Even though I dislike Trump and just about everything about his campaign, I can see that this is just a little bit too easy and self-serving a distinction between the two.
The point is, if Russia finds something that destabilizes the USA by actually finding the truth, is that good or bad? I don't want Trump to win, but I don't want to excuse Clinton simply because the other option is somewhat worse. Its sort of like picking death by hanging or firing squad. Sometimes a choice isn't really a choice.
In any case, it's all theoretical. I'm sure Clinton had real experts delete those emails, as opposed to the amateur hour IT that got her in trouble to begin with. If anything, the Clintons do seem to come through in the clutch when there's an investigation in the works.
Except that at that level, if your joke starts with 'If the Russians are listening...' it's not funny anymore. It's dangerous.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Valarie Plame was not a "undercover" agent. And Dick Cheney didn't out her, it was a well known secret.
The ONLY people offended by her "outing" were people who hate Cheney. Hate him all you want, just don't do it for this, it is a non-issue. I also find it simply amazing that this is a huge deal to certain people, while at the same time, those same people are voting Clinton, who has done much much worse.
Clinton exposed classified information by accident, and through a channel she (wrongly) felt was secure.
Libby deliberately leaked classified information to the press as part of a political smear job.
There's a vast difference.
Now I don't know that Cheney had anything to do with it, he may have explicitly ordered it, he may have created a culture where it was expected, or he may have stopped the idea dead in its tracks if he'd only been told about it.
I stole this Sig
You mean Hillary? Because Trump, despite all the mud being thrown this way, has done very little concrete evil in comparison.
Yeah, if you look past all the scams, lawsuits, lies about donating to charity, racist comments, racist acts, misogyny, donations for explicit political favours, mob connections, and rape allegations then he's practically a saint.
I stole this Sig
The blaming a Youtube video part happened pretty fucking definitely.
This is from a New York Times article in 2014:
On the day of the attack, Islamists in Cairo had staged a demonstration outside the United States Embassy there to protest an American-made online video mocking Islam, and the protest culminated in a breach of the embassy's walls- images that flashed through news coverage around the Arab world.
As the attack in Benghazi was unfolding a few hours later, Mr. Abu Khattala told fellow Islamist fighters and others that the assault was retaliation for the same insulting video, according to people who heard him.
In an interview a few days later, he pointedly declined to say whether an offensive online video might indeed warrant the destruction of the diplomatic mission or the killing of the ambassador. "From a religious point of view, it is hard to say whether it is good or bad," he said.
No one who obsesses about Benghazi seems aware that during the George W Bush administration, there were 39 attempted attacks on U.S. embassies, 20 of which resulted in fatalities. The total death toll in those attacks was 87, including three confirmed to be U.S. civilians, and another 21 who worked at U.S. embassies or consulates and were either of American or foreign nationality.
The reason you might not have heard of those tragedies is that unlike Benghazi, no one exploited them for politics.