Pure unadulterated bullshit-
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...john-podestas-email-password-was-password-la/
Right so the part of the Podesta leaks where Podesta and his staff talk about Podesta falling for a phishing scam are fake too?
Pure unadulterated bullshit-
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...john-podestas-email-password-was-password-la/
Right so the part of the Podesta leaks where Podesta and his staff talk about Podesta falling for a phishing scam are fake too?
The Russians were behind the hack of the DNC and Podesta.
The intelligence agencies said that the DNC hack and Podesta emails were both by the Russian government? They specifically said this?
What I do believe, however, is that Putin did order cyberattacks in an effort to influence US voters against a candidate he despised. As of now the only attacks we've been told about involve John Podesta and the DNC. As far as we know, only the DNC and Podesta attacks were successful (they probably tried to get into Clinton's email server but that was exposed to the public in a separate hack and there's no evidence Guccifer is linked to Putin.) We'll see what the declassified report contains, and whether additional attacks are disclosed.
Clinton's server she used as SoS has not been shown to have been hacked. Redacted contents have been released via FOIA. The Guccifer 2.0 claim of hacking the CF email system appears to be a hoax, the documents the result of the DCCC/DNC hack-
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecu...-hack-of-clinton-foundation-raises-suspicions
... I believe you have your phrasing wrong, it should be blame Benghazi on a video. Unless there's some video that was made and people were saying that the city of Benghazi or the events at Benghazi were the reason a video was made.What proof? None of them are supported and ever major cyber sec person has denounced them as a joke.
Kinda like how they tried to blame a video on benghazi.
This is a pointless argument. Contrary to what the alt-right and your talking head messiahs believe, the vast majority of left-leaning people don't believe Russia actually stole the election. I haven't seen a single credible report that voting machines were hacked, contrary to what Millenials and nouveau socialists believe.
What I do believe, however, is that Putin did order cyberattacks in an effort to influence US voters against a candidate he despised. As of now the only attacks we've been told about involve John Podesta and the DNC. As far as we know, only the DNC and Podesta attacks were successful (they probably tried to get into Clinton's email server but that was exposed to the public in a separate hack and there's no evidence Guccifer is linked to Putin.) We'll see what the declassified report contains, and whether additional attacks are disclosed.
Now given how the vote turned out, I doubt Clinton could've won whether or not the Dems were hacked. But that's not the point. The point is that a foreign power directly tried to interfere with our election process, and we're so divided that we can't even get bipartisan support (from both government and the public) for a full investigation. Instead folks are screaming "YELLOWCAKE! WMDs AGAIN!" and the President-elect is talking about scaling back our Intelligence services.
So yeah, the Left is gonna troll that Trump is illegitimate, and that Trump voters were duped by the Russkies. It makes for good lulz. But at some point we gotta get past that and agree that foreign powers hacking our democracy to influence elections is a bad thing, and a candidate who's so insecure about his legitimacy that he must remain in denial and disparage the entire intelligence community is disgraceful.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doesn't that go against the public poll that showed 52% of Democrats believe Russia directly hacked the voting machines and fixed the vote tally?
So no one knows?
The intelligence agencies said that the DNC hack and Podesta emails were both by the Russian government? They specifically said this?
The leaders of various intelligence agencies have been caught telling the public outright lies several times under the Obama regime. I can fully understand why the left would want to trust them in regards to the recent election. It's nice to hear what you want to hear even if in saying something they are saying nothing which is the case here.
Once Trump is in office and those clowns leading the intelligence community are shown the door and their replacements are in place I will be more inclined to believe what they tell me. I fully expect the left to show at the least the same degree of disbelief that I now have. When I don't trust the leader, the underlings can't be trusted either. I understand that sentiment.
Trump is still going to be inaugurated. If the left wants to pout, throw tantrums, denounce his presidency, not recognize it, that's fine. But screaming about the Russians shouldn't be included in all of that because it doesn't add any value and most importantly, it's not the root cause of the loss of the presidency. It's not going to bring Obama back or put Hillary in the White House either.
People in red states can be manipulated with fake news.The Russians and others have just discovered that our democracy, and maybe all Western democracies, can be manipulated pretty easily with fake news and phishing expeditions (maybe a little bit and maybe a lot) and this is a dangerous thing. My own reaction is that I don't expect another country or interests therein to piously obey our laws concerning election influence. So if Chinese interests donated money to a political campaign, I regard it as self-interest on the part of the Chinese. I can hardly demand that the US be free to meddle in other nations' politics but be considered immune from similar attention.
Although, in the past we made covert and not so covert efforts to influence elections, but it is natural part of foreign policy that all nations engage in a double standard when it comes to actions they perform against others as opposed to actions others perform against them. We willfully bomb other countries that we have people we don't like. Does that mean we shouldn't be bothered, if another country decides to bombs us?
Why don't you go read up on what they said yourself? Way easier than asking people here. They even made a report.
Report says absolutely nothing about John Podesta.
“We are approaching the point in this case where there are only two reasons for why people say there’s no good evidence,” Rid told me. “The first reason is because they don’t understand the evidence—because the don’t have the necessary technical knowledge. The second reason is they don’t want to understand the evidence.”
We assess with high confidence that the GRU relayed material obtained from the DNC and senior democratic officials to wikileaks.
This whole thing is way overboard on both sides of the argument.
Did Russia try to influence the election? Most certainly. Is it the first time? Nope! fuck I'm pretty sure every fucking country on the planet tries to "influence" the American election process every single time we've had an election since WWI on the national scale.
But "influencing" and actually changing the outcome is too different things. Did Russia attempted influence actually change the outcome with direct manipulations of the votes? Nope. So who the fuck cares?
You make a powerful assertion there at the end, right where evidence and support are most needed... and then you drop the mic. Just so you know, that's not how a mic drop works.This whole thing is way overboard on both sides of the argument.
Did Russia try to influence the election? Most certainly. Is it the first time? Nope! fuck I'm pretty sure every fucking country on the planet tries to "influence" the American election process every single time we've had an election since WWI on the national scale.
But "influencing" and actually changing the outcome is too different things. Did Russia attempted influence actually change the outcome with direct manipulations of the votes? Nope. So who the fuck cares?
This whole thing is way overboard on both sides of the argument.
Did Russia try to influence the election? Most certainly. Is it the first time? Nope! fuck I'm pretty sure every fucking country on the planet tries to "influence" the American election process every single time we've had an election since WWI on the national scale.
But "influencing" and actually changing the outcome is too different things. Did Russia attempted influence actually change the outcome with direct manipulations of the votes? Nope. So who the fuck cares?