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.
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
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.
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.
Have to agree. Hillary put me off with all the saber-rattling about no-fly zones in Syria and pushing all the news blaming Putin for the email hacks. Whether or not he had anything to do with them, she was still going to have to negotiate with him as POTUS.
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.
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/...
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.
We have Twitter and Facebook - people can directly ask the candidates whatever they want and get their answers: why rely on the MSM, which has shown itself to be demonstrably biased in favor of one over the other?
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?
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 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
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
Metaphorically the Russian bear is drunk as fuck, covered in puke in the gutter and babbling incoherently about 'former greatness'.
Former Soviet Republics should be ashamed of themselves for not being able to stand up to Russia. Sure the Ruskys have nukes, but their conventional forces would lose to Texas in a fair fight.
A large percentage of Hillary supporters are also morons. But well indoctrinated morons.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
IIRC, it requires his consent as well, not just hers. Also, has there been any statement from Ivana Trump confirming that?
This election was actually a joint FBI - Russia operation.
So, two nation-states worked to influence the election outcome. US intelligence and Russian.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Nope!!
She lost because she is a lying criminal who should be doing 5-10 in club fed.
She lied to Congress, she lied to the American public and she lied to the FBI while they were conducting a criminal investigation.
She doesn't know how to tell the truth, never has.
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.
Twitter is banning some fringe called the 'Alt Right.'
NiemÃller analogies come to mind of course.
Regardless, If this progresses as censorship is wont to do. At some point in the future you may not be able to talk to candidates Twitter doesn't agree with on their service.
--- Mercutio was right.
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.
We have Twitter and Facebook
No, _you_ don't. You use a service owned and operated by someone else with goals and ambitions that intersect yours only accidentally.
people can directly ask the candidates whatever they want
Sure they can. Just as before Twitter and Facebook, there was email, snail mail and good old face-to-face campaigning. Your Twitter post will get exactly as much time and attention as each of those got - if you are lucky a junior staff member might reply, but more likely you'll get canned responses.
and get their answers
How is the message a politician posts on Facebook any less curated and sanitised than the article that is written for the front page of a major newspaper? Because it comes from the 'source'? You'll get answers only if your questions fit the narrative that the candidate wants to promote. Anything else will be ignored. you can try calling them out on that, but you are one tiny voice amongst millions who are just going to see their favourite politician saying something, and a whole bunch of people approving of it. Go ahead and try to dissent. Try to question. Try to hold them to answer.
Social media is designed to create groups and communities. It's an echo chamber, with stories and articles that people like being recommended, linked to or sent on to people they think will also like them. Straight away you have a massive selection bias in the information that you are seeing. Nothing about it promotes objectivity or rigour. It's urban myths and chain letter levels of information quality - and _this_ is what you offer to replace the bias of mainstream media? Social media is _easy_. It's _comfortable_. You are unlikely to see anything that challenges your world-view. You and your tribe or team or whatever just keep patting each other on the back and congratulating yourselves on how together you all are.
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
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... .
It makes no sense for the FBI to have wanted to get Trump elected. Hillary would given the intelligence apparatus every blank check and free pass they could ever want. Trump might have given them that too, but also a heaping helping of uncertainty, idiotic desicion-making, and a President with: A man-crush on every nasty dictator out there; loose lips; and a lower brain that easily overpowers the upper one, all with access to highly classified information.
A much simpler and more sensible possibility is that James Comey is an idiot.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
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.
"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"
Then why did the head of the FBI bring up the whole email thing with a week left to go and let it hang until a day or two left? I wouldn't be surprised if it was an FBI operation by themselves. They are going to need lots of money for people and equipment if Trump wants all of the immigrants and Muslims out of the country. Even kicking out a couple million immigrants is going to mean a big ramping up of resources and lots more spying on the public.
The FBI isn't the DHS. Even if they were, Trump's promised a hiring ban in the federal government so they'd need a robot army to carry out Operation Wetback Part 2. There wouldn't be enough people to pilot all the robots, so they'd have to be artificially intelligent. So maybe the FBI pulled this off to bring about SkyNet.
That, or James Comey is an idiot.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I'm sorry but the US has soooooo many police agencies it's confusing which one does what.
I am convinced Hillary Clinton did not need Russia to discourage democrat voters from attending the election. She had her own talent for that.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
Simple,
Hillary in the debate threatened war with Russia over the DNC hacks. That's when the intelligence community, who was already very iffy on her because she has a reputation for being controlling, and blowing up on people. Decided there was NO WAY IN HELL we could have such a crazy person in charge.
And that Trump was much safer.
LOLWUT? When the hell did Hillary threaten war with Russia?
Also the idea of this crazy motherfucker being safer than Clinton is hilarious.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
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.
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.