The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[creekster]

Wait a minute. Yesterday everyone here was clamoring that Obama should be leading the charge. Now he should step back and STFU?

This is all so confusing.

Everybody here? Bully for them. I am not responsible for them, whoever they are.

Besides, you are always preaching nuance. Surely you can discern the difference between investigating what happened, precisely, and who did this, in a deliberate and non-sensationalist manner from leading with an alleged but unsupported conclusion before the investigation has taken place? Under the circumstances, given that we are talking about steps that will undermine the legitimacy of an election result in a way that is much more damning than a hanging chad, all parties should be very, very careful in what they say and when they say it (this includes Trump whose reaction was predictably over the top).

[Uncle Ted]

SO the CIA may be able to suggest that Russians hacked the DNC and the RNC but after that it gets a little unclear. Was it actually the government? What was the purpose? There is a big chasm between the fact of the hack and the analysis of what it means, why it was done and who ordered it to happen.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...KBN14204E?il=0

Here's what bothers me: by emphasizing the Russian involvement, the Obama administration is promoting a narrative that once again will heighten animosities and divisions in the electorate rather than close or lower them. Like it or not, and more than half of the voters don't like it, Trump is going ot be president. Rather than rally 'round the flag, as has always been down in the past (the bushes, clinton, reagan, carter, ford, etc. etc. all did this) the current administration seems to be pushing hard to foment discord and leave a nation greatly divided. Trump may be a disaster. There is every bit of potential for him to be as bad as he seems like he could be, but that doesn't mean we need to make it even worse for us and our system by promoting the idea thta the election result itself was fraudulent. Indeed, as we discuss the undermining of the system, promoting the idea that the election was a fraud and the result achieved only through outside interference does more to undermine the integrity of our nation and its system than anything Trump has yet done. So the Cia should tread very, very carefully here. And Obama should STFU and let things move forward.

Obama is making an ass of himself... He is saying that the Ruskies hacked the election but hasn't presented any proof of the fact. The bottom line is if the Russians hacked the election then it is the Obama's administrations fault for letting that happen. That is a failure under his watch. He was soft on the Russians and they have walked all over Syria, Ukraine, and in the South China Sea. The more Obama pushes this hearsay without showing us the proof the more he looks like an ass.

Oh yeah, Trump is going to be president and we are all screwed.

[creekster]

Is it the Obama team that is putting this out, or staffers in the senate or house?

Its a fair question. Obama's team announced that he wants a ful and final report before he levaes office, and before the Trump inaugaration. The implication is that he wants to know whether or not the election result is tainted by Russian interfernce. WHile this might be something we should determine, it is not something that has to be done prior to Obama leaving ofice except to the extent he intends to use it to undermine the legitimacy of Trump's election. Info about the current conclusions appear to have been shared by staffers and lower level Obama administration types.

[Walter Sobchak]

This is a good point. THe fact is that the revelaed information was all accurate. There is no evidence, AFAIK, that these disclosed emails were anything but accurate. It might be, and likely is, that the RNC is as bad. but there is no question that Clinton was corrupt and that the DNC was a pox on the democratic system.

+1.

Did Hillary Clinton collude with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie?

Yes, she did. Thank you Wikileaks.

Did Hillary Clinton receive advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie?

Yes, she did. Thank you Wikileaks.

Did Hillary Clinton accept massive donations to the Clinton foundation (and family members) in return for foreign policy influence?

Yes, she did. Thank you Wikileaks.


Yet, Clinton lost the election because of "Russia!". Paranoid nonsense.

[creekster]

Being a governor qualifies a person as smart? I thought you were the guy who railed against lifetime politicians as inept; now it is proof of a high IQ?

I'm really confused by Trump's world.

I dont really know if Perry is smart, and I imagine the Texas posters can opine about that from a position of experience. ALl I know is that he seemed very, very dumb in the debates. Like deer in the headlights dumb.

[myboynoah]

SO the CIA may be able to suggest that Russians hacked the DNC and the RNC but after that it gets a little unclear. Was it actually the government? What was the purpose? There is a big chasm between the fact of the hack and the analysis of what it means, why it was done and who ordered it to happen.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...KBN14204E?il=0

Here's what bothers me: by emphasizing the Russian involvement, the Obama administration is promoting a narrative that once again will heighten animosities and divisions in the electorate rather than close or lower them. Like it or not, and more than half of the voters don't like it, Trump is going ot be president. Rather than rally 'round the flag, as has always been down in the past (the bushes, clinton, reagan, carter, ford, etc. etc. all did this) the current administration seems to be pushing hard to foment discord and leave a nation greatly divided. Trump may be a disaster. There is every bit of potential for him to be as bad as he seems like he could be, but that doesn't mean we need to make it even worse for us and our system by promoting the idea thta the election result itself was fraudulent. Indeed, as we discuss the undermining of the system, promoting the idea that the election was a fraud and the result achieved only through outside interference does more to undermine the integrity of our nation and its system than anything Trump has yet done. So the Cia should tread very, very carefully here. And Obama should STFU and let things move forward.

Interesting.

The CIA assessed after the election that the attacks on political organizations were aimed at swaying the vote for Trump because the targeting of Republican organizations diminished toward the end of the summer and focused on Democratic groups, a senior U.S. official told Reuters on Friday.

Moreover, only materials filched from Democratic groups - such as emails stolen from John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman - were made public via WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, and other outlets, U.S. officials said.

The CIA conclusion was a "judgment based on the fact that Russian entities hacked both Democrats and Republicans and only the Democratic information was leaked," one of the three officials said on Monday.

"(It was) a thin reed upon which to base an analytical judgment," the official added.

Republican Senator John McCain said on Monday there was "no information" that Russian hacking of American political organizations was aimed at swaying the outcome of the election.

"It's obvious that the Russians hacked into our campaigns," McCain said. "But there is no information that they were intending to affect the outcome of our election and that's why we need a congressional investigation," he told Reuters.

Yeah, that's a pretty thin reed. Here's another theory. Assuming these reports of Russian hackers are as reported in this and other articles, maybe they quit hacking the Repubs because they looked and said, "Hell, nothing we could find out will be any more damaging that what is being revealed about Trump in the media and the damage Trump is doing himself." They could see the polls. Maybe they figured Hillary would win and wanted to damage her as much as possible in order to weaken her as the eventual President.

Or maybe what they were getting from the Repubs wasn't that useful. Or maybe the Repubs upped their cybersecurity and access was more difficult. Or . . . .

[byu71]

I dont really know if Perry is smart, and I imagine the Texas posters can opine about that from a position of experience. ALl I know is that he seemed very, very dumb in the debates. Like deer in the headlights dumb.

I give him a pass because he was on pain medication. Pain medication can really dumb someone down.

Look the guy managed to run for govenor and win several times. He also was a pilot in the Air Force and left at the rank of Captain.

If people want to call him dumb and stupid, fine. It is an easy term to throw around. I have been called dumb and stupid on here by people who I know I am and will be smarter than even when Alzheimers takes over.

[myboynoah]

I give him a pass because he was on pain medication. Pain medication can really dumb someone down.

Look the guy managed to run for govenor and win several times. He also was a pilot in the Air Force and left at the rank of Captain.

If people want to call him dumb and stupid, fine. It is an easy term to throw around. I have been called dumb and stupid on here by people who I know I am and will be smarter than even when Alzheimers takes over.

Leaving as a Captain doesn't seem to be all that positive. How many years in the Air Force?

[Walter Sobchak]

Or maybe what they were getting from the Repubs wasn't that useful. Or maybe the Repubs upped their cybersecurity and access was more difficult. Or . . . .

... claims that Russia was plotting to hack the election to install President-elect Donald Trump in power were the centerpiece of Clinton’s campaign, and a month after the election Democrats continue to hype the narrative.

[byu71]

Leaving as a Captain doesn't seem to be all that positive. How many years in the Air Force?

5 years I read about him on Wikipedia and have not verified it with a second source.

[Applejack]

5 years I read about him on Wikipedia and have not verified it with a second source.

My go-to second source is always google.com.

[byu71]

My go-to second source is always google.com.

Not that important to me to second source it. I prefer wasting my time on here.

[Uncle Ted]

Interesting.



Yeah, that's a pretty thin reed. Here's another theory. Assuming these reports of Russian hackers are as reported in this and other articles, maybe they quit hacking the Repubs because they looked and said, "Hell, nothing we could find out will be any more damaging that what is being revealed about Trump in the media and the damage Trump is doing himself." They could see the polls. Maybe they figured Hillary would win and wanted to damage her as much as possible in order to weaken her as the eventual President.

Or maybe what they were getting from the Repubs wasn't that useful. Or maybe the Repubs upped their cybersecurity and access was more difficult. Or . . . .

Given what we know about the Clinton campaign emails thanks to wikileaks this is more likely the case. (Good hell... the campaign chair's password was 'p@ssw0rd', his email was hosted on gmail, and even his crack IT expert fell for the phish email!)

The RNC, on the other hand, sponsors cyber security forums such as: https://www.law.csuohio.edu/programs/cybersecurity/rnc The speakers are some of the top folks in the industry. Also, I saw an interview with Reince Priebus on Cooper 360 where he mentioned that the RNC has their cyber security outsourced to a top security firm and they called the FBI to review their security when the DNC was hacked. I can't find that interview but here is Priebus on Meet the Press where he says basically the same thing...

CHUCK TODD: Does Donald Trump have confidence in America's intelligence?


REINCE PRIEBUS: Of course he has confidence in America's intelligence but we don't have confidence in the New York Times releasing a report of unnamed sources of some kind of study that itself in the Washington Post said was inconclusive to claim that because the CIA had hacked emails of the DNC and the RNC and only used DNC emails that meant that Russia was trying to influence the election because the other piece of this, Chuck, is that the RNC was absolutely not hacked, number one. We had the FBI in the RNC. We've been working with the FBI. We had intelligence...


TODD: Let me ask you...


PRIEBUS: Hang on, Chuck! The RNC was not hacked.


TODD: Well, then why was the FBI involved?


PRIEBUS: It's really simple because when the DNC was hacked we called the FBI and they came in to help us and they came in to review what we were doing and went thru our systems and went thru every single thing we did. We went thru this for a month. And we were not hacked. So wait a second, if we were not hacked and that is absolutely not true then where does that story lie?

[Color Me Badd Fan]

There's a Sky News piece on how Russian hackers also caused the result in the Brexit vote.

I'm now convinced there's nothing that Russian hackers can't do.

[myboynoah]

Mitt tried to warn us. People just laughed.