CIA says Russia influenced US election to help Trump win

here is what you have to understand about the left. they are boring. which means their cable news outlets and talk radio shows are boring. which means they have to listen to ours. so their perception of the right is fox news, Hannity and Limbaugh. imagine being a lefty and listening to that every day.

so while there wasn't anything close to the push back against Obama that we are seeing vs Trump, you wouldn't know that from watching Hannity.

 

did you miss the 8 years of *****ing, claiming he's not an american, racial statements, hitler comparisons (don't even know how they got to that) and random petitions for impeachments because he wouldn't make his birth certificate public info.

Also random hassling at pretty much every single event he was at

 

Odd because any post I've seen you make has been you showing a lot of love for China.

 

Personal favorite is probably Obama being the Devil on the History Channel.

 

All I'm saying is when Obama won I didn't see a mob of white people hitting the streets saying he's not my president, sure you had some nut cases but very few. I was all for Obama but after I watched him racially divide our country and bend over for terrorist countries not a lot of love left. With 30 something odd days left we're gonna get tough with Russia ? The Firk

 

Of course you don't like Russia, they gave up on communism.

 

Hahahahahahaha

Oh yeah they just accepted him and didn't obstruct him every single time they could. Remind me, is it 56 or 57 times that they tried to repeal Obamacare?

How many times was he called unamerican? Had to endure racial slurs? Follow up can be found in other posts here.

But you're either grossly misinformed or too biased for words. Almost like Ragic.

 

@SPiEkY go ahead, hit him with it, he's done it now, can't get more obvious generalizations then this

wait u posted this afterwards, but didnt call ragic out

...

are you.... biased?

 

Oh don't forget there was 4 assassination attempts on Obama

 

DarkJello said:
Calls out a "conservative" for being rude, but forgets to criticize anyone closer to his side of the debate that is ALSO being rude. SMH.

KingJad replies:
I'm more right leaning than left. You're just full of **** and it's kind of annoying.


I never said you were a Lefty. In fact, I never specified that I was only talking about you. And Sok did skip over plenty of rudeness, exactly as I stated. Facts.

 

Yet another terrorist attack. Russians, religion of peace, alt-right or El Cucuy?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...as-market-Berlin-leaving-two-people-dead.html

 

I made an inference because I wasn't exactly being nice to the right wingers in this thread.

 

Getting back on topic.

This is what I know:

1. All major US intelligence agencies, (and some foreign ones, which I'll get to later), have agreed that Russia was behind the hacks on the DNC and RNC (which doesn't get mentioned much), with activity focusing on the RNC eventually tapering off relative to activity regarding the DNC. However, having not read the full statements yet, it is not clear to me if they are all in agreement that Russia was behind the document leaks.

2. Several sources, including Assange of Wikileaks; as well as people not affiliated with Trump, Wikileaks, or Russia have claimed that the Wikileaks DNC and Podesta documents came from an internal source, which could make them independent of the hack, or it could make them liars/people whom were lied to.

3. Publicly, a fair bit of evidence has come out. Most of it is centered on what the DNC's hired tech agencies (plural, in agreement) have stated. That there were at least two active agents, most likely Russian spies, operating independently and having gained access to the DNC. The reason for thinking they are Russian is due to their methods of encryption and the IP being compared to prior hacks (in particular a similarity to hacks on German servers). While full details weren't quite released (or at least not in the articles I saw covering the topic), combined essentially with the "confirmation" by Intelligence agencies, I think it's reasonable to agree until proof otherwise that Russian nationals at the very least are responsible for the hacks.

4. Evidence tying the hackers to the Russian government has not to my knowledge been released to the public. While there are potential legitimate national security concerns (how that information would be obtained for example), until such becomes declassified or is released I have to keep an open mind. It could easily go either way.

5. Trump and Putin have largely been on good terms with each other. Clinton and Putin have, of late, not been. This combined with various tensions between Russia, the US, Nato, and other places around the world provide plenty of motive for Putin to actively attempt to scuttle Clinton's chances, ostensibly in favor of Trump. However, based on the FBI and (until their briefing) ODNI and likely some others reactions to the CIA assessment it seems that there is a concerted lack of evidence, even if it is plausible.

6. It is unclear whether or not the released documents really had a strong effect on the election. While the contents of some of the documents are quite damning, and some possibly even indicative of criminal action, it's also true that their contents weren't generally discussed on most of mainstream televised media. Though apparently Clinton/Podesta emails and wikileaks searches were very high on Google (relative at least to, for example the Trump video where he's speaking about what he can allegedly do as a famous person regarding women). However, regardless, hacking the DNC and other servers is a crime. If the Russian government knowlingly funded or ordered that crime take place, some sort of response is called for... (though IMO it should be done after the investigation is concluded, certainly not before).

7. The Whitehouse Briefings, and the Washington Post, have not mentioned that any new information was utilized for the CIA assessment, which was has never been given publicly (essentially someone leaked it to the Post).

8. While the Clinton Campaign issued statements that some of the Wikileaks documents may have been modified or fabricated, there have been, to my knowledge, zero specific denials, and several specific confirmations, as to the legitimacy of a given document that has been released.

9. The DNC and RNC are not governmental bodies. Attacking them does not necessarily equate to attacking the United States or its government (thus, for example, likely being why Nixon was not charged for Treason, though some have made the case that maybe he could have been after the fact). Still not a good thing to have happen though. Again, hacking in and of itself is a crime.

10. I still would like some pie.


Supplemental opinions which I suspect most would agree with to at least some extent:
The Russian Government is not nice. Neither is the US government. I have absolutely no doubt that if the US believed at all that releasing Putin's private documents would affect one of Russia's "elections" they'd have done it, and I'm not talking about merely as a response to the current situation. The US government has made a habit of getting involved heavily in the internal politics of other nations, and has since the start of WW2 (and probably a bit before that). The US government has also run plenty of bombing and drone strike campaigns in the efforts of assassinating people that they have declared terrorists, so trying to take the "moral high ground" with Aleppo rings false. That said, it most certainly does not justify what Russia has done either. To say nothing of Russia's domestic issues or the blatantly unfair means which Putin has personally held onto power.


If anyone has further details or info, please do share.

 

yeah a republican legislature tried to pass laws. what horrible 'push back'. totally the same thing as protests, and intimidating electors. and uh, racial slurs? youre kidding me right? so those are your best two responses to how the right has dogged poor Obama.

thank you.

 

I don't know where this notion of me hating generalizations came from. I only called out Sok's post because he was strawmanning while attempting to call someone out for strawmanning. Had it been more obvious that Sok's post was in jest, I wouldn't have said a thing.

 

Actually I think you'll find they tried to NOT pass laws

But can we get back on topic? This discussion is getting more out of control and more redundant with the Transition thread with how it's been going. It's expected but I'd like to have some degree of organization if possible.

 

you need to stop using daily mail as a source.

yes there was a lorry that drove into a christmas market in Berlin.

this is not on topic for this thread.

you post this and completely miss the Russian ambassador in Turkey getting assasinated? really?

 

Wouldn't know it from listening to guys whine about the right all day. You'd think news closer to home me would seem more important to you.