How EXACTLY did the Russians sway the election.

[TerranceL]

I'm sorry, but nearly all of that is irrelevant.

Not at all.

So what? That does not alter the fact that you have the situation of a foreign power hacking into your elections, with the express purpose of affecting the result in favour of one over the other.

Which machine was hacked which changed the results of the election?

Any responsible leadership would seek some means of reacting to that threat.

There should probably be some evidence first before we start reacting. Someone of us actually remember the Iraq war and understand what happens when you run off half cocked with intelligence that's telling you what you want to hear.

Any patriot would be placing the interests of his own country above the desire to placate a dictator in another.

The left is all about patriotism now? When did this happen? Last I checked patriotism was one step away from nationalism and neo-nazis. Now all of a sudden were supposed to all be patriots?

 

[Allandavid]

I know Watergate quite well and have done quite a bit of reading on the subject. Nixon was riding high going into the summer of 72 after his trip to China and he had a lot of support. This is why the activities he was supporting, were so stupid, because he didn't need the help. Watergate was reported on often before the November election, but it was thought to be limited to the five burglers and didn't go further then them. In time, it came out after the election it went deeper and by early 74, Nixon was either going to be impeached or he resigned.

And once again, the activities at Watergate yielded nothing of value to Nixon, but the burglers getting caught, started the domino effect of all the other activities Nixon's people were involved with, got exposed.

To recap: you have a story of wrongdoing, in which the major perpetrator is not suspected for some time. Instead, his supporters are seen as the main culprits. However, as more intelligence comes to light, it is found that 'the main man' was not only the instigator, but that he was also involved in many more unsavoury activities with his people, who helped him to cover up those activities. When faced with saving their own skins, or promoting their own interests, they produced the 'dirt' that they had on him.
Now, is the story set in the '70s or 2017?

 

[bhsmte]

To recap: you have a story of wrongdoing, in which the major perpetrator is not suspected for some time. Instead, his supporters are seen as the main culprits. However, as more intelligence comes to light, it is found that 'the main man' was not only the instigator, but that he was also involved in many more unsavoury activities with his people, who helped him to cover up those activities. When faced with saving their own skins, or promoting their own interests, they produced the 'dirt' that they had on him.
Now, is the story set in the '70s or 2017?

I can't stand the suspense, why don't you fill us in on the details.

 

[Allandavid]

I can't stand the suspense, why don't you fill us in on the details.

Well, like any good story, I guess you have to wait for the climactic ending!

 

[bhsmte]

Well, like any good story, I guess you have to wait for the climactic ending!

Ok, let us know when you are willing to share what you see in your crystal ball.

 

[Allandavid]

Psst bhsmte! Spoiler alert: keep an eye on these new revelations concerning Trump, Russian hotels and 'unusual showers'!

 

[bhsmte]

Psst bhsmte! Spoiler alert: keep an eye on these new revelations concerning Trump, Russian hotels and 'unusual showers'!

Will do.

 

[BubbaJack]

Psst bhsmte! Spoiler alert: keep an eye on these new revelations concerning Trump, Russian hotels and 'unusual showers'!

And especially keep an eye out on 4chan.

 

[TerranceL]

Psst bhsmte! Spoiler alert: keep an eye on these new revelations concerning Trump, Russian hotels and 'unusual showers'!

Heh.

You fell for that?

Did 4Chan Troll The CIA?

On Tuesday night, BuzzFeed News published an explosive, yet completely unverified, dossier alleging that President-elect Donald Trump engaged in a whole host of, shall we say unusual, sexual activities in Moscow. Matt already wrote about the basics of the report and the blackmail threat, so I'm not going to delve into that.

What's worth talking about, however, are swirling claims on Reddit that 4chan users on the board /pol/ completely made the entire thing up. According to a variety of posts on the pro-Trump subreddit r/The_Donald, a user on /pol/, a 4chan board, made up the most salacious story in the report. He then mailed it to anti-Trump Republican strategist Rick Wilson, who then went to the CIA. The story was then included on the dossier published Tuesday by BuzzFeed News.

Buzzfeed’s Trump report takes ‘fake news’ to a new level

You fell for something even the editor at buzzfeed figured out was libel but posted anyway.

At a moment when journalists are up in arms about “fake news,” what BuzzFeed has done here is take fake news to a new level. Its editor, Ben Smith, acknowledges “there is serious reason to doubt the allegations.” In other words, there is almost certainly fake news inside these memos, and it might all be fake, or some parts of it might be true but buried so deeply under falsity that it would be impossible to separate it out.

 

[Allandavid]

And especially keep an eye out on 4chan.

Well, I guess I could.
But I'll just stick with The Guardian, NY Times, CNN, Washington Post, etc for now thanks.
Let's see what unfolds.

 

[Kiterius]

The Russians hacked into the Clinton's water supply and poisoned Hillary so that now she is extremely physically ill.

 

[BubbaJack]

Well, I guess I could.
But I'll just stick with The Guardian, NY Times, CNN, Washington Post, etc for now thanks.
Let's see what unfolds.

Yes, keep looking, I WANT YOU TO DO THAT!! PLEASE DO THAT!!

 

[TerranceL]

Well, I guess I could.
But I'll just stick with The Guardian, NY Times, CNN, Washington Post, etc for now thanks.
Let's see what unfolds.

What chance did those sources give Clinton of winning the presidency?

 

[Allandavid]

What chance did those sources give Clinton of winning the presidency?

Not sure. But I know they did predict she'd win the national election.
And she did!
How does this relate to the incoming president's showering habits?
'Unpresidented', right?

 

[TerranceL]

Not sure.

They predicted it would be a landslide.

But I know they did predict she'd win the national election.
And she did!

You need a basic civics course then if you think she won the national election.

 

[JGG]

Please cite credible sources and specific proof.

For the sake of argument let's say that they got into the DNC email system - not real hard to do evidently. Also, no one has said they are false.

What specific e-mail or action has had a demonstrable effect on the election? Cite your sources please, you can offer an opinion, but be forthright enough to recognize what is opinion and what is sustainable fact.

I would say the bigger issue is that Russia has been caught - possibly several times - hacking into our information sources...and the President-Elect doesn't seem to particularly care. Cybercrime is a pretty big deal. Trump doesn't agree.

 

[Allandavid]

They predicted it would be a landslide.


You need a basic civics course then if you think she won the national election.

And you need a maths lesson.
NATIONALLY, 65 million beats 62 million.
She lost the STATE BY STATE election, which is how you folk determine who will lead you.
You're welcome.

 

[JGG]

They gave me vodka. Didn't the rest of you get vodka? Russia gave me vodka to vote for Trump.

 

[BubbaJack]

They gave me vodka. Didn't the rest of you get vodka? Russia gave me vodka to vote for Trump.

It wasn't better than Tito's.

 

[Allandavid]

They gave me vodka. Didn't the rest of you get vodka? Russia gave me vodka to vote for Trump.

I've been sent potatoes and a recipe to make my own, if I vote for their man in our next election.
They operate on a budget down here.