Declassified report: Putin ordered election interference to help Trump

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Childish Hyperbole based on a lie.

You just said we should consider phishing an email account an act of war, against arguable the top nuclear power in the world. If that isn't hyperbole I don't know what is.


Rhetoric on both sides has become a little overheated. This needs investigation, yes. You're making Trump look like the voice of reason here, which is a statement I never thought I'd make.

[Suppressed]

[Silver Pines]

Intentional low info voters who willfully choose ignorance are a dream come true for out of control government.

Anyone who actually reads the report realizes that this is a long way from over and how Trump deals with it will probably determine his future. Trump minimizing the report is not a good sign.

It was an act of war and requires a very strong response. Even Obama has been forced to show a little spine and send troops to Baltic nations. Trump would be well advised to double or triple those troops in response to the act of war Russia has committed against America.

@Cripplecreek

From what I've seen just glancing around a little, Paul Ryan and others acknowledge it's a serious issue, so I"m hoping Trump will have a number of voices that will influence him. 

If the Russians pulled this once they'll pull it again.  I think the report said they are focused on doing just that.  You don't have to be a professor of logic to flash forward four years and imagine a
scenario in which they try to influence results to benefit a hapless Sanders type.

Russia wasn't able to succeed in actually affecting the results---this time.  What happens if they do succeed next time?  Are we going to adopt the view that interference in our elections by a foreign power is fine as long as it might benefit our guy?

I don't care if Russia tried to help put John the Baptist in the White House.  This doesn't have a damn thing to do with individual candidates.

[rodamala]

My new cell phone threw this article from the Slimes at me with it's default "Briefing" app.  I just disabled the app.

Fake news... the only intent is to somehow plant the insinuation in the mind of the electorate that the ballot box was tampered with.

It's an attempt to delegitimate the election result, because it's "not fair"... it's "rigged".

I heard the very same douchebag whiner shit already... during primary season.

[HoustonSam]

If your post was a horse, we'd have to shoot it.   

And if this thread were a horse race, you just showed up riding a donkey; your reply says nothing.

[Silver Pines]

My new cell phone threw this article from the Slimes at me with it's default "Briefing" app.  I just disabled the app.

Fake news... the only intent is to somehow plant the insinuation in the mind of the electorate that the ballot box was tampered with.

It's an attempt to delegitimate the election result, because it's "not fair"... it's "rigged".

I heard the very same douchebag whiner shit already... during primary season.

 The results can't be delegitimized because the report states that Russia didn't succeed in affecting them.  So nothing was rigged.

I'm not going to fall into the TOS trap of concluding only the news I agree with isn't fake.

[DCPatriot]

And if this thread were a horse race, you just showed up riding a donkey; your reply says nothing.

@HoustonSam 

How could I, when your very first sentence was telling us Trump is no Capitalist?   How does one respond to that?

Threatening to use tariffs, etc., to keep American jobs here, doesn't translate into not being a Capitalist.   Not when you're looking out for 330+ million Americans.

[Cripplecreek]

@Cripplecreek

From what I've seen just glancing around a little, Paul Ryan and others acknowledge it's a serious issue, so I"m hoping Trump will have a number of voices that will influence him. 

If the Russians pulled this once they'll pull it again.  I think the report said they are focused on doing just that.  You don't have to be a professor of logic to flash forward four years and imagine a
scenario in which they try to influence results to benefit a hapless Sanders type.

Russia wasn't able to succeed in actually affecting the results---this time.  What happens if they do succeed next time?  Are we going to adopt the view that interference in our elections by a foreign power is fine as long as it might benefit our guy?

I don't care if Russia tried to help put John the Baptist in the White House.  This doesn't have a damn thing to do with individual candidates.

@CatherineofAragon

Bingo

Watergate didn't succeed either but we still punished it. Attempted bank robberies are punished exactly the same as successful bank robberies for a reason. We punish them as a deterrent.

Its true that hacking didn't change any votes which is exactly why Trump keeps fixating on it. Its a distraction from the other stuff that was going on. Psyops (Propaganda) is a lot tougher to judge effectiveness but I think it was pretty effective. Lord knows how many times eastern european websites produced fake pro Trump news that was repeated throughout social media without question. Nobody posters with 2 or 3 followers post a pro trump hashtag which is immediately retweeted by 10s of thousands of other no follower tweeps to make a topic trend before any real people even mentions it.

The report says that Russia ramped up the propaganda efforts in March of 2016. It wasn't all about Clinton and it wasn't all about Trump. More than anything its about undermining and sowing mistrust of American institutions and they've been very successful. They've managed to turn conservatives into anti free market occupy wall street types who trust Russia and wikileaks over our own intel people.

And finally there are the millennial snowflakes who fear that any resistance to Putin will result in a new cold war where millions will die. Right off the top they make it very clear that they know nothing at all about the cold war. I have friends who were stationed within sight of Russian troops. Not one of them ever fired a shot toward the Russians or had a shot fired at them by the Russians. And second, what Putin and Russia did in attempting to manipulate our election was a clear cold war act which will be repeated bigger and better next time.

No, Russia won't be invading us. Instead they'll try to control our government like they have done with all their former slave states in eastern Europe.

[Jazzhead]

The same can be said of the NYT's and the MSM against Trump..

Excellent point.   The smoking gun would be,  and it would likely lead to Trump's downfall,  wink-wink cooperation between Russia and Trump and his campaign.  In the absence of such evidence,  the intelligence report is really just the regurgitation of the obvious.   Of course Russia had a preference in this race,  just like the New York Times or NBC did.   And it worked,  it appears,  just as hard as the NYT or NBC did to discredit the opponent of its preference.   Indeed,  where's the indignation over the leak of the bleep grab video,  which NBC had to know about?   Is NBC any more in the moral right than Putin?   

The people saw mean and nasty shit electronically sabotage both candidates, and made their choice.    Yeah,  I think Russia has balls the size of churchbells and I can't stand those motherfuhyas.    But,  heck,  Obama and his weakness/fecklessness handed them a sword.    I don't disagree with Trump's basic message  -  it is time for some realpolitick when it comes to these mobsters.   

[beandog]

@beandog

Shrugging your shoulders and not giving a crap that a hostile foreign power actively interfered in a national election is not "growing up."  Don't delude yourself.  It's what Steve Deace wrote about recently---allowing politics to rot away your moral judgment and common sense.

So does it make you equally upset that we hack into other country's computers and spy on them?  Or is okay that we do it because it's us.  I have know problem with other countries doing to us the exact same thing we do to them.  It is our job to make sure they can't harm us.  Obviously this wasn't being done.

The Beast's campaign left themselves wide open to what happened to them.  The Donald had nothing to do with it.  She deserved it. 

[Rivergirl]

Obie blatantly interfered in the Israeli election.  Obie sent his America haters to Egypt to push for the overthrow of that government in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood.  They used social media to stoke unrest. 

[Cripplecreek]

Obie blatantly interfered in the Israeli election.  Obie sent his America haters to Egypt to push for the overthrow of that government in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood.  They used social media to stoke unrest.

And us accepting anyone doing it to us makes us even worse than Obama.

[Suppressed]

l have know problem with other countries doing to us the exact same thing we do to them. 

Yes. I had a problem with Obama interfering with Israel's election.  I take it you think it was as fine as Russia doing it.

Russia needs to stop pretending they are friends if they want to act this way. You don't see the US and UK behaving this way.

[Rivergirl]

USA has been known to assassinate national leaders of foreign countries for many decades.
All this hypocrisy is sickening.   
Unfortunately we now have a president who openly praises such crimes, which is how he came to be the beneficiary of such nefarious activity.
IT'S WRONG WRONG WRONG

[skeeter]

So does it make you equally upset that we hack into other country's computers and spy on them?  Or is okay that we do it because it's us.  I have know problem with other countries doing to us the exact same thing we do to them.  It is our job to make sure they can't harm us.  Obviously this wasn't being done.

The Beast's campaign left themselves wide open to what happened to them.  The Donald had nothing to do with it.  She deserved it.

There're two considerations here - one, the left is using this incident to try to delegitimize the elections. This is bullish*t. The DNC and Clinton campaign were slaphappy about cybersecurity, as they are blasé about national security, and they got burned. Tough beans.

The other is our attitude towards foreign espionage, which should be something like zero tolerance. Threatening punishment of countries attempting it makes us look inept and silly because as others have pointed out we do much the same. Our focus should be on preventing future incidents.

Our only response should be a resolve to make our systems impregnable.

[HoustonSam]

@HoustonSam 

How could I, when your very first sentence was telling us Trump is no Capitalist?   How does one respond to that?

Threatening to use tariffs, etc., to keep American jobs here, doesn't translate into not being a Capitalist.   Not when you're looking out for 330+ million Americans.

You argued that Communists would not favor a free-market Capitalist.  Trump is not a free market Capitalist because he advocates government interference with the free flow of capital in the form of tariffs.  Maybe that's a good idea if it protects American jobs but it's not free-market Capitalism.  Furthermore the Russians have not been Communists since Gorbachev.  I notice you drop any reference to Trump's attempt to enrich himself through eminent domain.

Trump is right that the Democrats and media are running a witch hunt.  But perpetuating the myth of Trump's infallibility by damaging the credibility of the US Intel community and excusing an adversary of the US for trying to subvert an election, especially with a counter-factual argument that is 25 years out of date, just makes you look bad.

[DCPatriot]

You argued that Communists would not favor a free-market Capitalist.  Trump is not a free market Capitalist because he advocates government interference with the free flow of capital in the form of tariffs.  Maybe that's a good idea if it protects American jobs but it's not free-market Capitalism.  Furthermore the Russians have not been Communists since Gorbachev.  I notice you drop any reference to Trump's attempt to enrich himself through eminent domain.

Trump is right that the Democrats and media are running a witch hunt.  But perpetuating the myth of Trump's infallibility by damaging the credibility of the US Intel community and excusing an adversary of the US for trying to subvert an election, especially with a counter-factual argument that is 25 years out of date, just makes you look bad.

@HoustonSam   "Eminent Domain" in this conversation is nothing but a backyard squirrel, and I'm not playing.

Eminent Domain is a necessary tool to revive local economies.

The people who are forced to give up their real estate are fully compensated according to the present market.

[skeeter]

@HoustonSam   "Eminent Domain" in this conversation is nothing but a backyard squirrel, and I'm not playing.

Eminent Domain is a necessary tool to revive local economies.

The people who are forced to give up their real estate are fully compensated according to the present market.

Thats not the hill to die on, DC.

Kelo was unarguably bad news for the liberty minded.

[HoustonSam]

@HoustonSam   "Eminent Domain" in this conversation is nothing but a backyard squirrel, and I'm not playing.

Eminent Domain is a necessary tool to revive local economies.

The people who are forced to give up their real estate are fully compensated according to the present market.

You just did play.

It's called "Eminent" because the public's interest in a joint common asset serving the public good such as a public hospital, transportation asset, or pipeline right-of-way, is understood to be more important than the right of the property owner to refuse to sell.  Trump's bottom line is not "eminent"; parking lots for casino/strip joints don't qualify as joint common assets serving the public good.  Compensation of the original owner is not the issue; that "argument" is itself the squirrel in the discussion.

Back to where you and I started, you argued that Communists would never support a free-market Capitalist so the Russians couldn't have done anything to favor Trump in the election.  But Trump is not a free-market Capitalist, as indicated by both his advocacy of tariffs and his attempted abuse of eminent domain, and the Russians are no longer Communists.  You attempted to perpetuate the myth of Trump's infallibility even at the expense of US security, by arguing from premises both wrong and anachronistic. 

Maybe the whistling emoji can magically convert your position into a cogent, valid argument.

[Hoodat]

I'm just shaking my head at what "conservatives" have become.

Ditto.  To now hear them champion the new $1 trillion 'Stimulus' is too much to bear.

[Hoodat]

Threatening to use tariffs, etc., to keep American jobs here, doesn't translate into not being a Capitalist.

Actually, it does.

Not when you're looking out for 330+ million Americans.

Ah, so now motive defines the action?  That is EXACTLY what liberals do.

[truth_seeker]

Thats not the hill to die on, DC.

Kelo was unarguably bad news for the liberty minded.

There is a whole lot of "eminent domain" besides the Kelo type.

One can be against Kelo, and for eminent domain. It is in the 5th Amendment  to our Constitution.

[Hoodat]

You just did play.

It's called "Eminent" because the public's interest in a joint common asset serving the public good such as a public hospital, transportation asset, or pipeline right-of-way, is understood to be more important than the right of the property owner to refuse to sell.

Just to correct one thing here.   The wording of Amendment V says "public use" - not "public good".  Big difference.

Kelo is one of the worst decision ever handed down by our Supreme Court.  Even Bernie Sanders opposed it.  Yet Trump still supports it 100%.  And because of that, his supporters who at one time were considered 'Conservatives', do likewise.

[HoustonSam]

Just to correct one thing here.   The wording of Amendment V says "public use" - not "public good".  Big difference.

Kelo is one of the worst decision ever handed down by our Supreme Court.  Even Bernie Sanders opposed it.  Yet Trump still supports it 100%.  And because of that, his supporters who at one time were considered 'Conservatives', do likewise.

Thanks Hoodat, that is indeed a critical distinction.  I appreciate your help in making my thought and expression more precise.

I think Trump found himself forced to defend eminent domain in order to defend himself in his New Jersey parking lot attempt (which is the basis of my argument here), and was thus forced to defend eminent domain in all cases because his case was the most egregious.  That's disappointing, but far less so than seeing intelligent people burn this Constitutional distinction on the altar of Trump's infallibility.

[Wingnut]

Although Vera Coking lost money on the deal by not settling with Donald "Eminent Domain" Trump. She did win the battle.