Slashdot Mirror
NSA Chief: Nation-State Made 'Conscious Effort' To Sway US Presidential Election (aol.com)
The head of the US National Security Agency has said that a "nation-state" consciously targeted presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, in order to affect the US election. From an AOL article:Adm. Michael Rogers, who leads both the NSA and US Cyber Command, made the comments in response to a question about Wikileaks' release of nearly 20,000 internal DNC emails during a conference presented by The Wall Street Journal. "There shouldn't be any doubt in anybody's minds," Rogers said. "This was not something that was done casually. This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect." Rogers did not specify the nation-state or the specific effect, though US intelligence officials suspect Russia provided the emails to Wikileaks, after hackers stole them from inside DNC servers and the personal email account of Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, John Podesta. At least two different hacker groups associated with the Russian government were found inside the networks of the DNC over the past year, reading emails, chats, and downloading private documents. Many of those files were later released by Wikileaks.Further reading: Quartz and MotherJones.
I am tired of the military-industrial complex requiring a boogie man to support their funding.
Hillary didn't lose due to Wikileaks. She lost because she promised absolutely nothing other than to be not Donald Trump.
Donald Trump promised to bring back jobs lost to off-shoring. He promised to bring back the parts of America that are hurting.
Hillary Clinton promised to say one thing and public and other things in private. She promised to continue the status quo of the elite ruling over us with little to no input from the public. She lost because her selling point was "first woman president!" and not policy.
She lost for a thousand reasons.
Wikileaks is not one of them.
Spy on Americans unconstitutionally. Lie about it. Keep doing it after getting caught.
The MSM and the Establishment have ZERO credibility.
and your little quisling trump as well
What if the effect was to get the DNC to start using GPG and other best telecommunications security practices effectively?
They inadvertently did the job that our own media should have been doing, if it hadn't been entirely co-opted by the ruling party.
The lying media should be ashamed of itself, but isn't.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
The US has been mucking around influencing foreign governments for many, many decades. Kinda sucks when someone does it to us.
This is last month's news.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
That's why she lost... well that and the arrogance, deplorables comments, claiming fetuses have zero rights as human beings right up until the point they're born, her ties to corruption, her ignorance about security and technology, her frail health, her sexist impeached husband, the media's lies to support her, hollywood's elite acting like spoiled children then hypocrites when they refuse to go to Canada.... and the list goes on and on.
It's not about how much we liked Donald Trump. It was about the fact that Donald Trump wasn't a Clinton or Bush.
What if the effect was to get the DNC to start using GPG and other best telecommunications security practices effectively?
God, people are just getting stupider and stupider. Even the attempts at humor is listless and pathetic (and deflect from any real point).
anymore than the U.S. populace in general did.
Hillary was on the war-path and they knew it. "No boots on the ground in Syria" my ass!
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
As far as I am concerned the only thing that is important was were the e-mails faked. If the were not than all said nation state really did was give us a better informed public.
Did they maybe not do the same to the other side? Who cares so what? Its not like all sorts of world leaders, and international organizations, didn't make their opinions known about who they wanted to be the next president. Should we image those acts and the resulting media coverage don't impact US elections?
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Just so I'm clear about your statement, you are saying it was incumbent upon the "lying media" to hack into the computer systems of one or all candidates (fair and balanced), breaking untold number of laws set forth by the computer fraud and abuse act, and disseminate the findings of which to the viewing public?
That's an interesting point of view.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
Unfortunately chances are we are dealing with Putin's proxy in the White House. Just the facts:
1) Trump had no interest in changing the GOP platform presented at the Republican convention, with one exception, he pulled all the hawkish lingo that condemned the Russian intervention in the Ukraine.
2) His second campaign manager Paul Manafort spent considerable time in the Ukraine working for the former president, and Russian asset, Viktor Yanukovych. He had to step aside when this connection became too much of an obvious liability to the Trump campaign.
3) The Russian deputy minister confirmed that they were in contact with the Trump campaign through-out the election process.
4) According to a CNN report, a Kremlin advisor admitted they coordinated with Wikileaks.
5) Trump has considerable business interests in Russia and visited the country often.
6) Trump exhibits considerable sexual appetite.
7) Russian "political culture" perfected the art of compromising politicians with embarrassing material, they even have a word for it.
8) Mother Jones reported that a retired Intelligence officer came forward, alleging that this is exactly what has been done to Trump.
The ruling party... you mean the Republicans? They've been in control of the government for a long time now.
Guess what other things they're likely lying to you about.
How did this clear shill get modded +5 Insightful? Look, I'm all for a wide range of opinions, but slashdot is becoming alt-right-dot lately. Are we, as a geek society, going to continue to let the far right take over slashdot? Seriously.
even more interesting is that there are enough breitbart trolls in /. to mod it up to 5 insightful
But i sincerely think it made little to no difference in the result. The Dems are certainly trying to pin what's probably their worse election in history to the CIA but the sad truth is that Clinton was never a good candidate. She certainly was qualified for the job though, but that has little to do with what ends up appealing to the voter.
If she weren't running against Trump her number would've been way worse. And this is fucking Donald Trump we're talking about.
People are wanting to audit the presidential results, people are also claiming that Russia swayed the election...
Almost without exception, all of these same people are against stronger voterID laws. Just how do you think elections really get rigged anyway? You can spend vast amounts of money to sway someone and fail (see: Hillary) which is why real election tampering creates the votes it needs.
No other nation but the U.S. has such laughable weak authentication around voting. If you want to see results get more and more whack, by all means block voterID laws...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The United States has been making "conscious efforts," one way or another, since at least the 1960's if not earlier. Unless the US has some super-special unique privilege among nations, then any nation can play in any way it pleases.
Supporters of get out of the UN cuz of sovereignty are applauding the interference of our elections by another sovereign nation. Really makes you think.
If you think it's a far right viewpoint to see the media as a pack of liars and shills for the Democrats, you need to re-evaluate your own biases.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Many laws were broken bringing Nixon to justice. Clinton broke many laws while in office and afterward.
Your answer is YES.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Hacking into email and such is obviously bad. The truths that were exposed by this though should have been ferreted out by the media a long time ago if they weren't more interested in kissing posterior for access rather than doing their job.
Geez, you're one sad individual, if you argue that the crimes exposed don't matter because of the manner in which they were exposed or by whom.
May you deal with interesting points of view.
The sky is blue.
I know, I know... none of you could've possibly come up with that on your own. Good thing I'm around to tell you what's what, huh? [eyeroll]
I think after the shit parade of headlines the editors chose today it's time to take a few weeks off wasting time here.
They inadvertently did the job that our own media should have been doing, if it hadn't been entirely co-opted by the ruling party.
The lying media should be ashamed of itself, but isn't.
What about the media who never found his tax returns, or the Apprentice out-takes that apparently made the Billy Bush interview look tame? Or the media who found out that Trump's own campaign didn't trust him with a Twitter account, and somehow didn't frame that as an October surprise.
The media likely gave more coverage to Clinton's emails than to all of Trump's many serious scandals combined. That is the great shame of the media.
That they also enabled a rival nation to successfully target one candidate is just one failure of many.
I stole this Sig
China was a big supporter of Bill Clinton:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Seriously, just go to YouTube and look up clips of news anchors being stunned into silence at their realization that Clinton was going to lose.
If you ever needed more proof that the media are Democratic shills, just watch what happened when they realized they had failed to rig the election in Clinton's favor. It was a magical and truly eye-opening evening.
Is it not right, that someone should have information, regarding a candidate? I think you'd have to be out of your mind, not to know the entire Clinton family is about as crooked as they come.
False equivalence.
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
Seek professional help. Many *many* conservative newspapers endorsed HRC over Trump. There is no conspiracy. Trump will be our worst President in decades (ever?).
Will you apologize after he fucks up our country?
The Snowden leaks showed us that the NSA uses lying, misinformation and subterfuge as its three main weapons. They have zero credibility and anything they publicly state are lies until proven otherwise.
Ain't that what one of them did w/ Trump's tax returns? It was only legal to release w/ his approval, yet they went out and did it anyway. So if they can do that, why not hack into Clinton's server and try and retrieve her deleted emails? Other than being in the tank for her?
Hey, not being George W. Bush worked for Obama...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Since the election I've been fascinated with the idea that only 1/3 Americans have a great or fair amount of trust in the media* while at the same time an increasing number of people prefer news from a single-source or whatever they find on facebook.**
What leads so many people to say that investigative journalism is a sham? If there is no free media, how do we trust any news. I'm sure not able to read the thousands of Wikileaks e-mails and do the research necessary to determine what is pertenant.
* http://www.gallup.com/poll/195... ** http://www.gallup.com/poll/193...
The relevance here is lost on me. Are you saying that Putin and Trump are both actually Robin Williams?
Seriously, just go to YouTube and look up clips of news anchors being stunned into silence at their realization that Clinton was going to lose.
If you ever needed more proof that the media are Democratic shills, just watch what happened when they realized they had failed to rig the election in Clinton's favor. It was a magical and truly eye-opening evening.
So fucking funny. I was flipping between the big three networks election night and one of them kept cutting to a recurring segment with a female "pundit" whose body language was hilarious. She looked like a puppy that had been swatted with a newspaper.
And then make up a bunch of fake stories about what was in the emails, since they turned out not to be particularly incriminating.
The available evidence indicates that said Tax return came from his wife at the time.
Entirely legal for her to release.
Should have been superfluous anyway, with him releasing his returns himself.
Expect that to bite him when some reporter does the legwork.
In a word yes investigative journalism should dig for real meat. I'm not talking what some dick picks etc but the HRC lets dump the TPP and will get the same things in later when they are not looking is exactly the sort of scoop a journalist should be looking for.
No sir I dont like it.
It's because they only believe news that confirms their views.
The near nation state called 'Liberal Press' published that she had it in the bag so folks became complacent and stayed home.
It's Russia's fault that CNN rigged the debates!
It's Russia's fault that Donna Brazille lied to us about the emails being modified!
It's Russia's fault that the DKIM authorization signed by Google provides non-repudiation for both the body & headers of the email!
It's Russia's fault that Hillary's top aide, Huma Abadeen, married the infamous sexter, Anthony "Carlos Danger" Wiener.
It's Russia's fault that Hillary lied, repeatedly, to Congress about the server she set up to evade oversight.
It's Russia's fault that Hillary emailed Colin Powell for advice on how to evade the Presidential Records Act.
It's Russia's fault they enacted a "pied piper" campaign to promote Trump because they thought he was the weakest candidate.
Why doesn't anyone understand that Hillary is the real victim here!?
Nope. I was voting against a criminal. I wasn't voting for anything in particular besides busting up the oligarchy in control in Washington the last 30 or so years. Mission accomplished.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
BS
and even if it were true, if your other candidate (funded by a nation state) weren't so corrupt, the truth wouldn't have been damaging.
Requiem for the American Dream
Since you obviously are too dense to have figured it out by now, painting all who disagree with you with the same brush you used to wipe dog shit off your shoe is what lost the election for the Democrats.
I like how providing evidence of wrongdoing is swaying an election. If U.S. media reported it would they have been swaying the election?
I'm not sure how to take this statement. Apparently the NSA is good enough to detect a "hacker" and yet powerless to stop it. So if this was an example of "cyber-warfare" are we to expect that the US is completely open and vulnerable, since no counter-measures can be taken? It seems that "the enemy" is so good that they can get in, do damage, get out and get away with it.
Or MAYBE... this guy is just making all this shit up and John Podesta, who uses a GMAIL account - was simply phished. "I was hacked" is the usual excuse to try and hide your own bumbling incompetence when something like this happens. Risking a diplomatic incident to try and distract from your own or your colleague's incompetence is monstrous.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Propaganda is a Kind of News; kinda like Truthiness.
People are now calling this the "Post-Truth Era". :)
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
IIRC, it requires his consent as well, not just hers. Also, has there been any statement from Ivana Trump confirming that?
The fact you know those things from "media" (and not a hack-leak) disprove the exact point you are trying to make.
Well timed and selected truths make the best propaganda.
Releasing those emails a week before the election so that the FBI could start another investigation into them probably swung it for Trump. Turned out that there was nothing there though, mostly just duplicates and nothing really related to Clinton.
In other words, they released nothing but innuendo and triggered an investigation. How is that not corrupt and deliberately misleading the public? And in what way did the media lie about it? Seems more like they wouldn't shut up about it even when it turned out to be nothing, all the while damaging her campaign.
You live in a strange fantasy land where the mainstream media is somehow in the Democrat's pocket while also helping them to go from a near certain win to a loss. They lapped up Trump's campaign too, giving him massive amounts of free publicity every time he said something stupid or outrageous. They were actively helping him, playing into the hands of an obvious demagogue who fed off controversy and being deliberately offensive.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Will the "left" apologize when (more) race riots rock Sweden as their economy collapses? Have they apologized for the race riots in your own country as the needless antagonism fanned by the "liberal" media caused death and destruction all through the US?
Of course not.
It does no good for foreign nationals to know how corrupt the DNC has been, and hide that from the American People. The people deserve to know the ethics of the people in charge of our courntry, and in charge of selecting our potential leaders.
The majority of the damaging links came with DKIM and other forms of verification. That is why the guilty parties exposed could not claim they were fabricated without facing legal actions and sanctions from numerous parties. $FOREIGNENTITY is simply a straw man that has been used to distract from the evidence, instead of discounting the evidence. Facts do not discount the evidence.
To your second point, it's a red herring. $FOREIGNENTITY replaced with $WHISTLEBLOWER makes the argument a little more valid. If Government actors behaved as they are legally required, for the best interests of their citizens, then we would not have need for Whistle blowers. The fact is, and will remain, that people holding positions of power often use that power for personal gains without consideration for the people they are supposed to be representing. In fact we find very often that those actions are done to spite the people they are supposed to represent.
The moral of every story of Utopia is that it can not exist because humans are not all altruistic and honest. Humans are imperfect and full of flaws. Fantasies about a Western Utopia under the current administrations are exactly that. They have damaged the middle classes of the UK and US considerably, hence we have Brexit and Trump. Of course we also have a whole lot of that same power structure trying to push back against both of those things.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Much of what was 'revealed' by the Wikileaks releases was already known by the media. The leaks only acted as confirmation. Over the years, these stories emerged, then the media seemed to run dead on each one. If they had performed their jobs of investigative journalism - seeking out stories, developing and following up leads, looking for inside sources - then perhaps Hillary Clinton wouldn't have made it as far as being the Democrat candidate.
As I read elsewhere, they seemed to have taken the following action: "It's the job of the media to cover stories. Cover the stories with a pillow until they stop kicking."
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
I know one superpower that has intelligence service in the business of swaying elections and causing civil wars and fighting in them. it isn't Russia's
"What leads so many people to say that investigative journalism is a sham?"
The bias of the media towards the status quo. They will make some token gestures about shit which doesn't matter, but when something important to the establishment like TPP or immigration or undeniable Social Justice TRUTHS are concerned the media exposes itself.
"If there is no free media, how do we trust any news."
We pick out whatever suits our prejudices ... for a lot of us this leads to more racist views than if we had a media we could trust, but alas.
Doesn't have to be hacking into the media. We already knew some of the behind the scenes pre-pledging of the Super Delegates by DWS own words. - to beat back grass roots efforts. That showed there was some bias within the DNC to start with. Good journalism would have delved deeper, dug up other sources, and looking for more dirt that many of us already felt that was there for the finding.
The fact that they didn't do the hard work of vetting some of this, and it took a major email breach to accomplish this, at least to me, does show that "journalism" is mostly dead and has been replaced with the bread-and-circuses of "sensationalism" and "click-bait".
How would you define "the ruling party"? There are republican majorities in the house, senate, supreme court (until Scalia died), among governors, most state legislatures, and most state courts. Either way, neither party has co-opted anybody. The media has only one job these days, make money for their stock holders. They give exactly zero shits about being the fourth estate. The only reason Fox News has a conservative bent is because their marketing team decided that it was a way to differentiate themselves and get more eyeballs for their advertisers. Just remember: you are the can of soup, not the customer.
They were stunned because most polls showed a different result. Some of the people most stunned were Republicans.
nothing to fear, right govt?
You're thinking that any media organization or journalist or whatever has the ability to breach a server which at this point is probably offline if it's even still assembled, and then scrape the raw contents of the hard drives and try to recover deleted data? And that, if they aren't able to do that, then they're "in the tank". I'm pretty sure that the server is not assembled, is not online, and that the hard drives were removed and given to her lawyer. But if the media can't recover deleted data from those hard drives, they're "in the tank". I'm starting to think that hacking or computers in general "ain't" your strong point.
I don't know if you've been paying attention, but most "journalists" do all of the research that they need to do on places like Twitter and Facebook. The investigative journalist is a thing of the past, with notable exceptions being people like Brian Krebs.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Mission accomplished.
Hey Bush, you might want to wait until the end of the war before you declare the mission accomplished. Trump hasn't even announced a cabinet yet. You have no idea what his administration is going to look like or how they're going to act, just like every other person who voted for him. Not a single person, including and especially Trump himself, knew what they were getting into.
If Trump manages to not break multiple laws over the next year or two and get himself impeached (or just up and resign, talking about how everything is rigged against him), I'll be shocked. Congress would much rather deal with Pence than with Trump. If that happens I'll come back and ask you how the mission is going.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Another way to look at it is in addition to activists groups, corporations, billionaires, we now have nation stations lobbying for candidates.
What is Investigative Journalism?
Ideology for $500 Alex.
It means Shelly Duvall has joined the ranks of Margot Kidder, Randy Quaid, Dave Chappell and Martin Lawrence in falling afoul of Hollywood's ruling elite reptillians.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
If it takes a foreign nation hacking in our nation to make sure the Truth gets out, then so be it.
Innocent until proven guilty. Trump hasn't even had his day in court. You can't say he's a criminal. Oh wait, you mean the other one.
A large percentage of people are also morons. But well indoctrinated morons.
So John Podesta's fell for some phishing attack that allowed some hacker to access his account which happened to contain a treasure trove of incriminating emails from lots of people in the Hillary campaign, the DNC, and the media....and somehow that means that only one side was targeted??? I have the feeling that if some prominent Republican had also fallen for it and there were a lot of embarrassing emails in their account (i.e. not just yoga lesson schedules and wedding plans), that WikiLeaks would have ZERO hesitation in releasing them to the whole world. We have no proof that the hackers didn't try to get emails from everyone in both campaigns, but only Podesta fell for it.
Hillary did a lot of stuff by the book. She is that kind of person too.
No Fly zones historically polls well and sounds tough without much risk or investment if you actually do it. The threat of it has considerable weight as well. It is a political tactic and it was being used during a campaign. It wasn't something to take that seriously but it was something they should have researched instead of just relying on past knowledge.
The experience they drew upon worked against them because the public was so sick of being played by the numbers that it was hurting them and they didn't seem to realize just how much. That said, ANY legitimate criticism you can come up with because it was so close.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
With all their millions of dollars of donations to the Clintons.
Obama set the record for an active president campaigning for Hillary Clinton . http://abcnews.go.com/Politics...
Obama in 2011 Trolling Trump, funny Trump has his job now http://time.com/3991301/donald....
Obama Feb 2016 , Trump won't be president http://www.bloomberg.com/polit...
Obama "at least I will be a president" http://www.politico.com/story/...
Obama playing the KKK card https://www.theguardian.com/us...
Obama continuing his un-presidential arrogant tone http://www.businessinsider.com... .
he must be tripping
The "lying media" had no problem when it was a other side with Sarah Palin's email. The reported on it non-stop and tried saying Palin's was trying to hide things. With Clinton it is suddenly unethical, abuse and illegal. Wikileaks even posted the emails https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Sar...
The real point is that all this "mysterious" nation state did was to reveal to the US people what is actually going on inside the US political system. Personally i think they should be applauded.
"after hackers stole them from inside DNC servers and the personal email account of Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, John Podesta."
If the US has become such that revealing corruption is now seen as a bad thing to do then FSM help us all.
You guys thought this was the Information Age. You believed that propaganda line like it was some kind of holy moniker, enshrining this time for all eternity as a crowing achievement in human knowledge and communication.
I saw it for what it was, right from the start. This is the Age of Bullshit. Every avenue of human communication has been turned to the purposes of creating want where there is none, obfuscating or even eradicating the truth from the public record, and presenting everyone and everything in terms of how easily they are bought and sold.
Its all Bullshit. Don't believe a word of it.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
My husband use to be a big time cheat,and i was curious of getting proofs about it for real then i saw recommendations about mastershield55@gmail.com online and never hesitated to contact him,He asked me for some few information about my husband mobile device no personal info was asked for also,i provided it all to him and in less than 24 hours i was getting too see my husband text messages,call logs and as well as whats app messages as they come into his phone,i was able to get good and solid proof for my Antony to file a divorce,if you are having similar issues i would advice you contact mastershield55@gmail.com tell him Wilshere Kate referred you.
> Just so I'm clear about your statement, you are saying it was incumbent upon the "lying media" to hack into the computer systems of one or all candidates (fair and balanced), breaking untold number of laws set forth by the computer fraud and abuse act, and disseminate the findings of which to the viewing public?
No, we're saying they owed us an honest analysis of what was found--such as what happened with the Pentagon Papers or at Watergate--not a cover-up due to their being complicit in rigging the debates (Donna Brazille), holding illegal fundraisers (WaPo Party) and all the other things.
"did not specify the nation-state or the specific effect"
So they cant name the nation but have a blog of detail about secret methods.
So we are to understand "two different hacker groups" swayed the votes of millions in the USA?
Hacker groups ran an election platform on a vision of jobs? Secure boarders? Less wars? Less debt?
Thats called an election platform. Policy statements that resonated with real people in the USA far away from the elite contractors, lobbyists, polling firms bureaucrats, technocrats, celebrities and tame media pundits.
Re " found inside the networks"... The reality would have been more of an insider walking out with material. Recall the Pentagon papers and its role in US domestic politics and freedom of the press?
How did the groups get identified? BEAR code that is really, really well understood and so very public people can blog about it?
But has existed since mid 2000s? Thats a good few years in the wild to understand its Windows entry.
The US public was told so quickly, so it had no national security interest or secure investigation.
No US secrecy to protect counter measures, just tell the press everything? Nice detailed public blogs about such super secret and advanced nation only methods?
How about ensuring staff and random outside groups cant walk out with data in bulk? Use real encryption on everything... real encryption, not that tame backdoor, trap door gov approved junk.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
if they were, they wouldn't clumsily leave troves of incriminating evidence left behind, just like the NSA. You don't acquire the skills to breach networks, if you're basically a clumsy burglar with stuff falling out of your pants as you operate. The "evidence" was either left behind to suggest it was Russia, or it's just made up accusations, period. (most likely the leak was intentional, from inside)
Again with the "rigged" bullshit. Still claiming everything was "rigged", even though the side claiming all the "rigging" won! Oh I know, it's because the Repubs sent all those paranoid election monitors to the polls, they prevented the "rigged" election! Sure they did.
The polls were wrong. Pollsters get paid to be correct, they are not paid to produce an incorrect prediction. Now the pollsters are scrambling because they have a big credibility problem. See how that works? They are following the money, and the money will only be spent on them if they can be accurate. So the polling firms weren't "rigged", instead they screwed up.
Some of the media probably were biased, I can accept that. However Fox is biased too and they lean hard right, so as far as I'm concerned media bias is a wash.
Really, this whole "rigged" complaint needs to be tossed out as so much election bullshit. If the system was rigged as the complainers say, then Clinton would be President right now. She isn't, the system isn't, and this meme has all the credibility of that old Iraqi Communications Minister, while Saddam Hussein was still in power.
James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence flat out said that US intelligence agencies don't have good insight on when or how Wikileaks obtained the emails.
The people who want to shoot down Russian planes over Syria blame Russia, but until there are facts it's conjecture.
Lets see your evidence of conviction for a crime, of course you dont have one, so you lie that she is a criminal.
It would be of equal credibility if I said you were a criminal, after all its not like you need a conviction eh?
I am convinced Hillary Clinton did not need Russia to discourage democrat voters from attending the election. She had her own talent for that.
I was the first person to post on this, seconds after the initial airing, and my post was never published.
Was it because of the actual content of that particular post? You decide. It went something like this:
"If FB is a media company, then FB users are the content creators, and should be paid for their efforts. In other news, FB goes bankrupt overnight."
I will be reviewing subsequent posts from my secret undahgroun labnatory, underneath Virginia!, as I direct my gnanofax to assemble an intergalactic force never before seen by the like of you sorry dirt-monkeys.
Jest sayin'..
Let's not forget that:
* Hillary's entourage of foreign donors also tried to sway the results of the election by funneling money to her through her fake charity.
* The Liberal media did the same by trying to alter our perception of Hillary and her chances or winning.
* CNN did this too by feeding answer to the debates to the DNC and by asking them for questions to hit Trump with.
In light of this, who is worse? The actors who revealed Hillary's wrong doing, or the ones who conspired and colluded with her?
Both parties had their reasons for wanting to influence the election results.
They keep mixing those two leaks to give the false impression that Hillary didn't lie so blatantly on the debate and the narrative against the Russians. Some people from intelligence agencies claimed the DNC hack was or "had signs of being" from a nation-state attack. They didn't do so about the Podesta emails (the closest was to say that if it was from a nation-state, the people from the top would be involved, duh). This was the case again, he commented on the DNC hack and not the Podesta emails leak.
The DNC hack was released a long time ago and showed mostly the rigging of the primaries (AFAIK). The Podesta emails showed much more and were being released in the last few months. The money laundering from international campaign funds. The "no-fly zone will kill a lot of Syrians" statement (while she defends creating a no-fly zone). The debates rigging and a lot more.
After statements about a specific hack, media outlets mix the leaks to keep the narrative against Russia. In the best case scenario, bad Slashdot editors can't keep up with the events or filter BS. Another possibility is that they are after the clicks. But the worst case is that they are actively pushing lies to keep a narrative that is being used to keep people uninformed/confused.
James Clapper just announced:
"After the issuance of the statement and the communication that I know took place between our government and Russian government, it seemed to have curtailed the cyberactivity that the Russians were previously engaged in," Clapper said.
He said he was specifically referring to the "cyber-reconnaissance" that had been observed prior to the statement. "That sort of activity seemed to have curtailed," he said.
He said intelligence agencies don't have good insight on when or how Wikileaks obtained the hacked emails.
Of course, he could be lying again, as US intelligence officials usually do.
They're called the Clinton News Network.
Quoting Opinion pieces on left wing rags hardly establishes facts. Trump has the Ms. Universe pageant in the US more often than not, so I guess he's pro US. Then again, they voted a Japanese model Ms. Universe in 2007, so I guess he's a Japanese puppet.
Your argument is stupid, which says much about the author. Keep reading those left wing rags though, it's great for your mental health to live in an echo chamber.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Russia used multiple channels to influence elections.
They really started focusing on this a good decade ago, when launched Russia Today channel, when was it ... 2007?
Here are the few things that we know for a fact:
1. Manafort. Took Russian money while in Ukraine.
2. Alex Jones. This one has been heavily influenced by Russian smooth talkers. Has Russian beautiful girls as his staff (in Austin,Texas). Alex knows that his show is being listened by very influential people at the top (Trump environment). Alex has always defended the undefendable - the Crimea occupation, occupation of Eastern Ukraine. Bottom line, Alex Jones probably received money from Russia, as he jokingly says that "this advertisment is paid by the Russians".
3. Russia Today is basically a cover organization for one of the Russia's intelligence agencies, a mix of intelligence agency and propaganda arm. They have tried to interview and to befriend multiple journalists in United States. To be precise, they have done in all the countries where they have launched Russia Today. A lot of people got tainted with Russia Today either by interview opportunities or either by working for them (such as briefly hiring Luke Rudkowski).
These are three overt sources that can easily be verified.
Russia has multiple covert sources and levers to influence. What has been suspected is emails' scandal, and DNC and Podesta hacking, including hacking by Russians. Final tool is Russian operatives, pretending to be Israeli's, British or any other nationalities.
What NSA did not say, is that Russia has already influenced Brexit. They have also influenced elections in certain other Eastern European countries, where populist parties won the elections with a bit of "organizational" help from Russia. One common denominator is a wow for good relationships with Russia. What NSA did not say, is that Russia, quite frankly, is ALWAYS trying to influence many politicians, including Clintons, who got a nice cut from Uranium deal. They also did not say, that Russia is trying to influence their neighbors and pretty much every European country.
Good thing is that Trump is smart and he will be coached by intelligent people on how to behave with the individual who has a soul.
I'd say so, once you're in office in politics your whole life should be transparent. Fuck politicians, fuck them right in their fat fucking asses. I mean they all demand the same from us, so why not? We can't prosecute them, after all, Hillary proved that, same with coney and a myriad of others. What other options do we have?
She promised to be someone with three decades of experience in Washington, someone with strong financial and political ties to Wall St. who didn't tweet weird xenophobic shit at all hours of the day and night.
That's one disqualification.
Whereas with Donald, I quite lost track.
And again, you're spewing lies
Where did *I* lie about anything? I never said anything about what I believe. I said that if people were concerned about elections being rigged, why should they not support VoterID laws?
You seem awfully touchy on the subject, so much so that you went off track from what I said... talking points much? You are obviously a parrot for some left wing Groupthink that has you by the short hairs.
Many studies have shown that there's very little to no election fraud that could be "fixed" by voter ID laws
This is the part where I gaze at you with doe-eyes and ask if there's no problem it solves, how come all of Europe (and Canada) goes to so much effort to have very strict voter ID laws in place?
*cocks head quizzically*
Oh, I can tell by that blank look on your face I'm totally off your script! I guess you'll just have to rant about some other unrelated nonsense in response and ignore this point,
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Russian intervention in Ukraine?
Russians gave Ukraine a low interest loan and a cheap rate on gas. The west wanted Ukraine to take on IMF loans with crushing austerity measures. The assistant secretary of state, Victoria Nulan, is on video bragging (in front of Chevron banners) about the billions spent to bring the country "the future it deserves" to mold Ukrainian politics to American Exceptionalist liking. And then you asshats have the chutzpah to claim that Russia was trying to influence the presidential election in the United States.
The IMF side couldn't win at the ballot box, so they started a goddamn coup against the elected government, even after early elections were agreed to. You think for a nanosecond that the United States would sit with its thumb up its ass if Russia overthrew the duly elected government of Canada or Mexico?
Dumb.
Fuck.
Er.
Eee.
You are really super butt hurt about all those criminal Democrats having their dirty laundry revealed. That's how deep your indoctrination goes: you even hate TRUTH when it is against your criminal candidate.
Did not they think about that it could be just policy failure? In accordance with Occam's Razor principle this is just it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As for a "nation state", it is a common practice that a state may provide some support to opposition groups. The USA does it for decades in Russia practically openly; and in other lands too. So it may be that they are learning and kind of trying to give a taste of own medicine.
Mr. Podesta could use the the Google 2-Step Verification on his private Gmail. It is amazing, that a man who decides the destiny of the world does not use 2-Step verification. Was he qualified for this role in the first place?
The head of the US National Security Agency could explain to Mr. Podesta and his colleagues how to use it and why in proper time instead of blaming now everyone except himself.
All the propaganda for Hillary from the establishment and media was shocking for a country that talks of democracy elsewhere, while not practicing it itself.
Fact: The DNC used media contacts to portray the candidates more the way they wanted. Fact: The DNC promoted Hillary and demoted Sanders. Fact: Hillary lied under oath. Fact: Obama covered for her. Fact: Hillary was responsible for weapons going to ISIS. Fact: Hillary violated secrecy laws that others have been jailed for.
That a foreign nation state helped shed light on these facts was a god send and a travesty of shame on the US media that failed to objectively research and report news. But then it's painfully obvious that Obama already was a puppet of foreign nationals like Soros.
You are trying to be funny, right?
Or have you been playing too much of the first edition of Illuminati, the card game?
"I will spend 5 lucre I support of the FBI taking over the Whitehouse with the assistance of the KGB, the Oil Companies, and the Boy Sprouts".
this is why you lost.... - Inkshard. Check out Youtube for the low down. I do not completely agree with the mathematics involved, however EVERY other word that comes out of Eric Muss-Barnes mouth is certainly on point.
when we do it to other country, it's OK, it's "national security".
when other country do it to us, fill in the blanks.
"There shouldn't be any doubt in anybody's minds,"
But.. why SHOULDN'T it?
Baiting for peoples attention is NOT a sensible or reasonable way for one to use the word "should" or shouldn't".
What are you Mike Rogers? A fascist telling people what to believe?
So, then, what does Mike Rogers mean by "This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect.". Saying it is so doesn't make it true, or rather, doesn't make this statement meaningful.
Sorry, but US government has a zero value trust rating with me, and any of your assumptions are basically nonsense.
Actually, that's just your blinders talking. When she got involved in the use of military force, she made the Bush Administration's handling of the occupation of Iraq look like it was being handled by Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great. Do you realize what she did just in Libya that we can confirm?
1. We overthrew a dictator who was complying with international WMD disarmament protocol.
2. We knew in advance that the majority of rebels were Islamists aligned with Al Qaeda.
3. There was precisely no ground game, not even a counter-insurgency strategy for helping a transition regime wipe out undesirable rebel factions that wouldn't submit to the new regime (and that's assuming that we found ourselves in a position where the new regime wasn't worse than the rebels that wouldn't submit!)
4. She knew that there were a ton of MANPADs and other devices suitable for serious and brazen acts of terror that needed to be secured. Did we even get boots on the ground early on to secure them? Nope. She, like most politicians today, thinks you can win a war with air power alone.
#1 alone should have sent blood chilling tingles down the entire foreign policy establishment's spines. The harm she did to WMD disarmament efforts with Libya was incalculable. She assured us of a scenario where even if a substantial faction of Iranian leaders wanted to comply in good faith, they would not be able to bring themselves to do it because the evidence that "compliance means assassination" was right before their eyes under the same administration that was negotiating with them.
Whether or not Hillary lost because of hacked emails or whether it was Russia, some other "nation-state" or just some kid somewhere, at least there was some exposure of behind the scenes dealing. To think that such dealing was unusual, or unique to Hillary or Clintons is a bit naive. That doesn't make what is probably SOP in politics acceptable.
What really bothers me is that no one has hacked documents from Trumps financial empire. There are lots of evidence of conflicts in interest in areas of workers' safety, minimum wage, unions, immigration, corporate tax law, non-profit reporting and transparency laws, nepotism laws, banking and financial regulation, separation of church and state, etc. All of that doesn't even begin to describe Trump's international business interests which conflict with the US Diplomatic interests.
Trump's track record suggests that he's never done anything that didn't benefit himself or his children. Regardless of his promises or politics, this is a concern, because in the end we have to ask ourselves if his interests are really our interests, even if we agree with what he says.
If hacking the DNC, & etc to expose corruption there was beneficial, then, especially now, it is important for hackers to get to work and find Trumps tax returns, contracts, his non-profit foundation dealings, etc. The trickle of evidence that responsible media have been able to obtain suggests massive ongoing conflicts of interests and possible illegal activities. Perhaps Russia, some "nation-state", or just some kid somewhere can help us get at the truth here.
We need to not only have IDs, but a state wide system that tracks when people check in at the voting precinct. That solves two problems in and of itself. First, it blocks people from voting who should not be voting and second, it would allow for people to vote wherever is convenient for them. It would mean that you could just go to a precinct near your workplace instead of one close to home. It would also mean that state voting officials could tell people who might have to wait in line where they can go to vote more quickly.
Consider the common liberal scenario where the poor are supposedly being disenfranchised. All you have to do to establish a reasonable effort to get them what they need is to send a mobile registration team with smart card printers, notaries and a lawyer or two. Just announce that the people will be showing up to do free voter registration in 3-6 months and that they will need a Social Security card and either a birth certificate or naturalization documentation.
You know what the best part of this sort of registration is? You can register convicted felons if you do it right. Doesn't matter. Just tie state and federal criminal justice records to the voter ID so that if someone is convicted of a felony, the record automatically gets flagged so it doesn't work until the system either lifts the block or they get a pardon.
One nation is attempting to affect the politics of another. Who'd of thunk it. Not like the U.S. government, who would never attempt to influence the politics of another government.
...oh, no, never. At least no leader was killed like Allende or Gaddafi or Hussain.
Sour grapes from the USA Federal Government. While the thieve of these emails was illegal, the release of these emails was exactly what the media should do. That's why the USA Constitution recognizes a "freedom of the press". The only pity that I see is that the Media in the USA, by-in-large, ignored these emails after they were released. If knowledge is Power, then the release of these emails empowers the voters to make a more informed decision. That the USA Federal Government complains that they were "caught" and exposed, it of no consequence in the overall scheme of things IMHO. It goes with the territory of being a Government. Suck it up Admiral! Man up Admiral!
The United States itself... there's a fracture within the Intelligence Agencies, and the leak was internal.
God, these liberal twats just can't handle losing, can they? This is THE problem in America now. Land of the 'Participation Trophy'. If you don't get your way it's someone's fault. Not YOUR OWN, mind you, but someone.
Sane Americans of sick of the lying, the hypocrisy and the corruption from the Abortion that is the Democratic party. That's what swayed the election, not some shadowy 'nation-state'.
Fucking ridiculous children STILL throwing a tantrum. Amazing.
Pax Vobiscum
Can't wait till this guy is STFU.
Seriously, STFU ... show us your proof or stop making these claims. It is far more likely a U.S. intelligence or pissed off Bernie campaign insider did this.
And who gives a flying F*** who did it. The emails clearly showed that the massive attempt to defraud the American public and affect the election was carried out by Hillary and the DNC. Showing proof of their misconduct is far less than the conduct itself. Had they not done wrong, publishing all those emails would of been useless.
Hillary and the DNC, should be punished for what they did during the Democratic primary, and afterward.
As if the US does not do exactly this in foreign elections. Or you know, invade and overthrow democratically elected leaders
There was certainly a lot of official ( but plausibly-deniable ) actions against Trump
If she had used the security protocols like she was supposed to, the Russians likely wouldn't have been in her server. And had she done that, she might not have been emailing the sensitive information that should land her in jail.
What difference, at this point, does it make anyway, eh Hillary?
FTFY
The media was, as usual irresponsible, but it reported on whatever was likely to get eyeballs. They didn't in general call Trump out on his lies. They dished out baseless innuendo on both candidates.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Does this mean that the DNC has to pay a bounty to the hackers for reporting the many vulnerabilities they had?
Or does WikiLeaks not count as a report? 8-}
They didn't have to hack in. They were already in. They've been in for decades. They're part of the problem. We know from Wikileaks that Hillary had the power to tell the NY TImes what they could publish! I mean think about that a moment. This is yellow journalism at it's finest. They would feed her the questions to the debates even. Rigged the primary so Burnie would fail - and we all let Hillary get away with that as well. Fake articles, the whole nine yards. Even fake articles about a Fraternity if Virginia by Rolling Stone and we know it was intentional. All to push their agenda of bullshit, that a lot of people STILL believe with all their heart. They still think Trump is the boogeyman, and putting boogeymen in charge (boo, did I scare you).
1960s song (Jefferson Airplane) - When the truth is found to be lies
And all the joy within you dies
Don't you want somebody to love, don't you
Need somebody to love, wouldn't you
Love somebody to love, you better
Find somebody to love
So here we are today. Another very failed Democratic administration taking us $14 T into new debt (actual, around 60T in future liabilities), causing wars by intentionally making wrong decisions in the 2008-2015 timeframe shitting muslims that look a lot like an invading force all over Europe and bringing terrorists here, as well as Heroin - AGAIN! It's even in my neighborhood - again! Dumbasses protesting in the streets - AGAIN. I remember that from the 60s. Lawlessness again.
Seems like we never learn. Wonder if I'll see it a third time.
Still have to clean up all the turds in the street just like last time. Some people ended up in jail for 30+ years.
I think you have that half right. Trump is a name that sells papers, but there was also as much of a news conspiracy against him as could be reconciled with the MSM's ideas of fair reporting. How could this be? Well, Trump spent the last year not only threatening to sue over any bad press, but also threatened to expand libel laws so as to make the media easier to sue for unfavorable press. He repeated that threat throughout his campaign, right up until the election. Trump has many enemies in this world, and he had a direct hand in creating pretty much all of them.
Not just Hillary, but democrats in general. I was a big Bernie fan and the DNC unfairly shutting him out left more than just a bad taste in my mouth.
Yea me too I would have voted for Bernie.
No one talks about the DNC Bernie supporter that was shot in the back right after the leak. All evidence points to him leaking the emails NOT the Russians. I have yet to see any real evidence that the Russians did this. They keep saying its the Russians but where is the proof?
The US literally kills and helps kill people in order to determine who is in power in other countries. Releasing the hacked emails of a corrupt politician is hardly an evil thing to do. And ultimately, ballots are cast by US citizens, not foreign governments.