Trump Won the Election Fair and Square — That Doesn’t Mean the Russians Played No Part...By Jonah Goldberg

[mystery-ak]

 Trump Won the Election Fair and Square — That Doesn’t Mean the Russians Played No Part
The Russians did not decide the election, but their attempt to influence it merits serious attention from all parties.
By Jonah Goldberg — December 14, 2016

Of course Donald Trump thinks it’s “ridiculous” to claim the Russians rigged the election for him.

Even if Vladimir Putin confessed to the crime on Russia Today, Trump would not believe it, because to do so is not in his nature. I do not want to shock the reader, but Trump has a very high opinion of himself and a tendency to reject evidence that contradicts that opinion, combined with an eagerness to find corroboration of his self-regard wherever possible. For instance, during the campaign he could never concede that online polls weren’t scientific, because the results of these polls confirmed that Trump was terrific, fabulous, and tremendous.

So there was nothing shocking about Trump’s behavior over the weekend.

Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace asked, “According to the Washington Post, the CIA has concluded that Russia intervened in the election to help you win the presidency. Your reaction?”

more
http://www.nationalreview.com/node/443017/print

[Cripplecreek]

The biggest role Russia played was by way of social media propaganda during the primaries.

Its far more insidious than any hacking.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

None of this makes a lick of sense to me.

Allegations that the Russians were being the Wilileaks hacks were being made by the MSM and the Clinton campaign back in July.  They pushed that storyline relentlessly, and I'm sure a large number of people came to belief that the Russians were involved at some level.  But so what?

It's pretty apparent that voters thought the message -- in the form of the emails themselves -- was more important than the messenger.  What they ended up caring about was not "was it the Russians", but rather "are the emails legit"?  And when it turned out they were, it (rightfully) hurt Hillary's campaign.  Would the election have been more honest/fair if voters never found out about all the crooked stuff the DNC was doing?  Because the entire argument amounts to less informed voters being preferable.

All this post-election emphasis on a story that was basically out there already long before the election is really an attack on voters.  Some people just don't like the fact that voters took a different spin on the WikiLeaks emails than the Clintons and MSM wanted, and essentially are arguing that disagreement invalidates the election.  That's just crap.

I don't know if it is the difference in terms of accepting responsibility between the left and right, but if something similar had happened to a GOP candidate, I wouldn't be mad at the Russians.  I'd be mad at the idiots who engaged in the conduct and wrote those emails in the first place, and at the idiots who apparently didn't understand cybersecurity.   

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Let's not forget all of that money the Clinton's took in from foreign powers.