Did Russians interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections and is such interference acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lynnvinc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridgerunner said:
So the FBI is just taking the DNC’s word for this?
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, yes, that is the case. And not only the FBI but 17 other intelligence agaencies, or the entire IC, or…
And why would the DNC deny the FBI access to its servers unless there was something on them they didn’t want the FBI to see?
Click to expand...
Weirder and weirder.
Click to expand...
Yeah… the whole thing has just been weirder from the start.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Wait and see. When all the testimony is heard (most of which we’ll never hear) and all the opinions rendered, the Dems will claim it proves the Trump organizations was in league with Putin and the Repubs will claim it proves nothing. But there won’t be any clear indication that the Russians changed a single vote, and I doubt either side will claim that it did, any more that the FBI or NSA says it does now.

But I’m sure, in the future, the Dems will get better software to keep the Russkies out of their communications and the Repubs will get better software to keep the Dems out of theirs.
Click to expand...
What I’m wondering is… if the Ruskies put fake news on twitter and fb in favor of Trump and all the MSM was favoring Hil??? Something doesn’t seem right. Are “they” saying nobody was watching MSM? or nobody was listening to them? Yet everyone was reading fb and twitter??? and that’s how we got snookered by the Russians??? I’m really confused… Maybe we should just get rid of internet during election season???
 
Ridgerunner said:
And the British parliament probably did more to harm Trump than the Russians did to harm either Trump or Clinton. One recalls some of the MPs attempting to ban him from Britain altogether, for all the awful reasons they offered.

Compared to that, Russian hack of DNC headquarters (if they did it) is pretty puny stuff.
Click to expand...
How would the British parliament attempting to ban Trump harm him in the slightest in a US election? I can’t imagine any Americans caring what British MPs do in this regard.
 
lynnvinc said:
But it is sort of weird that the Right now seems pro-Russia. Of course that wouldn’t be pro-communist, but rather pro-authoritarian. Which is very weird, since the Right claims to be for individual liberties and state and local rights, etc. But it does seem that many think authoritarianism is our American value, that we are here to serve and protect the president, r/t vice versa. Or authoritarianism seems to equal freedom in their minds. Or something I can’t quite figure out. It was very weird when that Congressman Yoho said Nunes works for the President (but later retracted that after being criticized).
Click to expand...
I think it has more to do with the fact Putin appears to not deride but openly praises Christianity (except Protestantism and JW’s if you count it as a branch of Christianity), the nation-state and cultural conservatism.
This radio programme may be of interest:
Why do populist politicians across the West want warmer relations with Russia? Are they just Kremlin agents? Or are they tapping into a growing desire to find common cause with Moscow - and end East-West tension? Tim Whewell travels from Russia to America and across Europe to unravel the many different strands of pro-Moscow thinking, and offer a provocative analysis which challenges conventional thinking about the relationship between Russia and the West.
Click to expand...
Donald Trump is just one of a new breed of Western politicians who want warmer relations with Vladimir Putin. Most Western experts say that’s dangerous: an aggressive Russia is plotting to divide and weaken the West. But Trump and others seem to have tapped into a popular desire to reduce tension and discover what Moscow and the West have in common. Could Moscow now lead a “Conservative International”, promoting traditional social values and national sovereignty around the world? On the right, some see Russia as a spiritual beacon. Others, both on the right and left, simply think the threat from the East is much exaggerated - and are warming to Russia as a protest against the Western establishment. Maybe it’s time for a new way of understanding relations between the old superpowers.
Click to expand...
bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08dnryy
 
Ridgerunner said:
Nobody is covering anything up.

And what “mitigation” do you think is going to keep Russians, Iranians, Chinese or anybody else from gathering intelligence from the U.S. when it can, and using it to advantage, if it thinks it can?
Click to expand...
Beyond my pay grade. But sourcing information, and exposing the work of foreign governments would be very useful.
 
St_Francis said:
What proof do they have? The FBI was denied access to investigate the servers, and so far the only investigation that has been done is by a private firm hired by the DNC, Crowdstrike.
Click to expand...
This was covered in Comey’s testimony.
 
ATraveller said:
I think it has more to do with the fact Putin appears to not deride but openly praises Christianity
Click to expand...
While murdering opponents, destroying the independence of the judiciary and press, and running a kleptocracy. He supports traditional values of gay bashing and wife beating. He has violated international law by annexing territory by conquest. He had acted as a war criminal in Syria.

He is no champion of Christianity, and is a disgrace in particular to Eastern Christianity.
 
dvdjs said:
While murdering opponents, destroying the independence of the judiciary and press, and running a kleptocracy. He supports traditional values of gay bashing and wife beating. He has violated international law by annexing territory by conquest. He had acted as a war criminal in Syria.

He is no champion of Christianity, and is a disgrace in particular to Eastern Christianity.
Click to expand...
It’s concerning how so many across the West can overlook these things. Turning to Putin is not and will never be the solution to the problems in the West. The sad thing is that despite knowing what Putin is tapping into, the ruling classes still are clueless as ever as to what the fundamental problems are.
 
It seems quite evident to me that the Russians did not bring Trump across the finish line.

Remember, the original implication is that the Russians hacked into voting machines in swing states, which isn’t possible since some states still use paper ballots and voting machines aren’t on-line.

I also doubt any election judge in rural Michigan or Wisconsin is going to risk fraud if Boris Yelostovsky calls at 2 AM on election night and offers a bribe----and I haven’t seen any evidence of that either.

This was a good play by the Democrats, though, because the Russians are always trying to hack the USA. Since Barack Obama and his folks didn’t take cyber-security seriously, it does provide a weakness our adversaries will try and exploit.
 
ATraveller said:
It’s concerning how so many across the West can overlook these things. Turning to Putin is not and will never be the solution to the problems in the West. The sad thing is that despite knowing what Putin is tapping into, the ruling classes still are clueless as ever as to what the fundamental problems are.
Click to expand...
It’s far more likely that current states in the EU will turn to Putin as the EU collapses in on itself than for American to turn to Russia.

American and Russian turning to each other is just a twitter fantasy of hard-core Trump supporters, many of whom do not understand the global landscape.
 
ATraveller said:
It’s concerning how so many across the West can overlook these things. Turning to Putin is not and will never be the solution to the problems in the West. The sad thing is that despite knowing what Putin is tapping into, the ruling classes still are clueless as ever as to what the fundamental problems are.
Click to expand...
Actually they are not the least bit clueless. There are people working very hard on solutions. But the answers are not simple, and are not what the Trump followers want to hear.
 
TMC said:
Who, beside Trump, still denies that Russia interfered in the election? Seems like its nearly unanimous in both parties. Nikki Haley is the latest to say so publicly, but seriously, who else still denies it?
Click to expand...
The communist would want a communist to win, that would be Hiliary.

Every US elections has foreign influence. Seems the foreign contributors to Hiliary’s foundation have fled when they no longer would have influence.
 
dvdjs said:
Do you really have no idea how campaigns work, or are you deliberately deflecting?.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

It was a change election and the Democrats ignored the warning signs.

The PEOPLE rejected the Democrats in the electoral system.
 
buffalo said:
The communist would want a communist to win, that would be Hiliary.

Every US elections has foreign influence. Seems the foreign contributors to Hiliary’s foundation have fled when they no longer would have influence.
Click to expand...
See, the left has to believe that their ideas didn’t lose and it was someone else’s fault.

Is that really so surprising?
 
SuperLuigi said:
:rolleyes:

It was a change election and the Democrats ignored the warning signs.

The PEOPLE rejected the Democrats in the electoral system.
Click to expand...
You’re ignoring the primaries, where no doubt there was also interference.

Or heavy influence, if you prefer.
 
SuperLuigi said:
It seems quite evident to me that the Russians did not bring Trump across the finish line.

Remember, the original implication is that the Russians hacked into voting machines in swing states, which isn’t possible since some states still use paper ballots and voting machines aren’t on-line.
Click to expand...
Straw man argument. This is not the supposed influence that is claimed here.
 
petra22 said:
What I’m wondering is… if the Ruskies put fake news on twitter and fb in favor of Trump and all the MSM was favoring Hil???
Click to expand...
Except that the MSM was not all favoring Hillary. They reported Comey’s announcement days before the election, and that was very damaging. Also social media was used more than the MSM to form people’s views.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top