Did Russia Really Hack Us? A Discussion.

[Saucy]

So, this might be a bit of a conspiracy theory, but it's one I seem to be taking to more and more.

PLEASE! All I ask is for an open mind when you read this post. If I'm wrong, please share why with evidence.

Often times, on the fringe edges of journalism, an article pops out of the woodwork. While all the other news sources hype on "17 different intelligence agencies confirm Russia interfered", which turned out to be a lie (it was only 4 intelligence agencies), and the majority of focus on destroying Donald Trump, it's difficult for that one fringe article to get much attention.

Well, I saw one that was written earlier this month that sort of opened my eyes a bit and it sort of makes me consider what I was already sort of suspecting...that the entire Russia story is a cover-up.

I would like you to read this article and tell me what you think. It really connects the dots in a different way that makes more sense to me. Maybe because I want it to be true, sure, but I think it fits the way things have happened from my perspective.

This was many months after the FBI had taken physical custody of Clinton’s homebrew server and other devices containing her e-mails. It was also two months after the Bureau’s then-director, James Comey, had told the country that the FBI had found no evidence that Clinton had been hacked . . . but that her carelessness about communications security, coupled with the proficiency of hackers in avoiding detection, meant her e-mails could well have been compromised throughout her years as secretary of state.

Do we forget so easily that this was the story BEFORE the emails were released via Wikileaks? Comey DID say her server wasn't wasn't hacked.

As the press likes to say, Flynn was sacked over his contacts with Russia, which were the subject of an FBI investigation. What they unfailingly fail to add is that (a) Flynn was fired not because he had contacts with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak but because he misled Vice President Mike Pence about the substance of them; (b) there was nothing inappropriate about Flynn’s having discussions with foreign counterparts during the Trump transition; (c) the FBI investigation targeted not Flynn but Kislyak, who, as an agent of a foreign power, was under FBI surveillance when he spoke with Flynn; and (d) therefore, the FBI recorded the Flynn-Kislyak communications and knew that Flynn had made no commitment to address Russian objections to sanctions imposed by President Obama (i.e., there was no quid pro quo for Russia’s purported contribution to Trump’s election)

....

Thus, Flynn has provided Democrats and their media friends with plenty of help advancing the Trump-Russia narrative. The strategy has been transparent for months: Make Flynn radioactive, turn Flynn’s name into a synonym for “collusion,” and, presto, anyone Flynn touches becomes evidence that Trump “coordinated” with Putin to steal the election from Hillary — regardless of whether the anyone in question has anything to do with Trump or Russia.

Another important point to note. I've stated this before, but Flynn keeps getting brought up as if he did something wrong in his dealings with Russia. He didn't. He just lied about it. But he also lied to the Trump team and was promptly fired for lying. If he lied to Team Trump, then how was it proof of Trump's collusion?

The purported Russian hackers are not identified either. Nor is Flynn’s “intermediary” — the Journal cannot say whether the leak is accurate, whether there really was an intermediary, or whether Smith could have been the intermediary. There is, moreover, no indication that any supposed Russian hacker actually made any effort to obtain the Clinton e-mails, much less that Flynn — let alone Trump — had any knowledge of or involvement in such an effort.

First, there plainly was no conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian regime to meddle in the election. If there had been, it would be unnecessary to trace attenuated, unconsummated arrangements between obscure partisans, anonymous hackers, and nameless intermediaries. There would have been no need for Trump to use a press conference to express hope that Putin would find the missing e-mails. There would have been no need for Flynn and Jared Kushner (Trump’s son-in-law and adviser) to try to set up a back channel to the Kremlin weeks after the November election. If there were anything to the “collusion” tale, the Trump and Putin circles would have had all this covered during the campaign.

I wish I could post this entire article, but there are rules against such things. It's a really good read and explains a lot of what I believe have been going on behind the scenes.

You have Obama saying before the election that there's no hacking going on, no one can hack us, when supposedly it's been going on for a year. You have Comey saying there's no evidence that Hillary's emails have been hacked.

You have Loretta Lynch getting on a private plane with Bill Clinton, Comey saying Lynch wanted to change the wording and call it a 'matter', not an investigation. You have Hillary cheating and receiving answers to debate questions ahead of time.

Finally, there is a quite astonishing variance in the standards of proof applied by Democrats and their media allies. On the one hand, we have damning evidence that Clinton destroyed government files and mishandled classified information. On the other, there is a dearth of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Now riddle me this: Who got a complete pass, and who is the earth being scorched to nail?

Article: Still No Collusion Evidence

 

[SnowyMacie]

I don't know, and I'm not going to believe anything either way until the investigation has concluded and they have informed the public of their decision.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Trump counterterrorism adviser blames Russia for election hacks

 

[mark kennedy]

The Russians hacked the election and they do a lot of this. Trump is too cozy with them and there is a profound conflict of interest Trump seems oblivious to it. I will be worse next time and we are on the brink of escalation.

 

[LoAmmi]

The Russians hacked the election and they do a lot of this. Trump is too cozy with them and there is a profound conflict of interest Trump seems oblivious to it. I will be worse next time and we are on the brink of escalation.

Trump is too cozy with any strongman leader.

 

[Halbhh]

It's just distasteful to Americans that Trump Jr. met a Russian to try to get dirt or good smear material on Clinton.

Like how you would feel if your neighbor met some shady private investigator to try to dig up things on you that could be spun to hurt you in an underhanded way.

You'd not be able to really respect a neighbor that did that, in regard to their personal conduct.

So it is with a lot of Americans in regards to the administration.

We simply want better. Someone more like Washington, Adams, etc.

About the other issue, Russia trying to influence the election, that's just the assessment of all the major U.S. intelligence agencies. Not even at question any more.

 

[Saucy]

"Tried to meddle" is very different than "hacked". Of course they tried to meddle, but were they successful in actual hacking?

 

[Go Braves]

"Tried to meddle" is very different than "hacked". Of course they tried to meddle, but were they successful in actual hacking?

I say tomato you say tomat-oh.

 

[Saucy]

It's just distasteful to Americans that Trump Jr. met a Russian to try to get dirt or good smear material on Clinton.

Like how you would feel if your neighbor met some shady private investigator to try to dig up things on you that could be spun to hurt you in an underhanded way.

You'd not be able to really respect a neighbor that did that, in regard to their personal conduct.

So it is with a lot of Americans in regards to the administration.

We simply want better. Someone more like Washington, Adams, etc.

If I was a candidate for election, I would suspect my opponent was doing whatever necessary to uncover dirt on me. Do you really think elections have been nice up until now? Andrew Jackson's election in 1828 was the end of probably the most brutal elections in American history.

Douglass said about Lincoln: "He's a horrid-looking wretch, sooty and scoundrelly in aspect, a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse-swapper and the nightman."

You mentioned Adams, but his campaign was probably one of the first dirty ones: Inside America’s first dirty presidential campaign, 1796 style - National Constitution Center

 

[Saucy]

I say tomato you say tomat-oh.

No, trying to influence through posting fake news sites and such is NOT the same as hacking Hillary Clinton's computer, stealing data, and publishing them.

 

[Aldebaran]

"Tried to meddle" is very different than "hacked". Of course they tried to meddle, but were they successful in actual hacking?

Exactly! I voted for Trump, as did many other people. I don't feel I was "hacked". I made the decision out of my own free will. To say that Russia/Putin was responsible for how I voted is to say that my vote wasn't valid.

 

[Saucy]

Exactly! I voted for Trump, as did many other people. I don't feel I was "hacked". I made the decision out of my own free will. To say that Russia/Putin was responsible for how I voted is to say that my vote wasn't valid.

This is why I defend Trump. The left wants to make it seem like Trump only won because of cheating or was aided by collusion with a foreign government, not that there were actual people who supported and voted for the guy. It's like our votes don't matter to them and it's frustrating.

 

[Go Braves]

No, trying to influence through posting fake news sites and such is NOT the same as hacking Hillary Clinton's computer, stealing data, and publishing them.

Russia meddled in the election by hacking, Saucy.

 

[LoAmmi]

No, trying to influence through posting fake news sites and such is NOT the same as hacking Hillary Clinton's computer, stealing data, and publishing them.

It's possible that they hacked the DNC server. We don't know for sure, but some intelligence agencies reported that they believed the Russians were responsible.

 

[SnowyMacie]

It's possible that they hacked the DNC server. We don't know for sure, but some intelligence agencies reported that they believed the Russians were responsible.

I always thought the question wasn't whether or not Russia did interfere with the election, but whether or not anyone in Trump's campaign was involved in it, and if so, to what degree. Then, was Donald Trump involved in that, and if so, to what degree. We don't actually know because it's all still under investigation.

 

[Halbhh]

Do you really think elections have been nice up until now?

No. Who could that knows some history. Of course, knowing history, then you know that some presidents are of better character, and won on character.

 

[Aldebaran]

Russia meddled in the election by hacking, Saucy.

What did they hack?

 

[Saucy]

I always thought the question wasn't whether or not Russia did interfere with the election, but whether or not anyone in Trump's campaign was involved in it, and if so, to what degree. Then, was, and if so to what degree, Donald Trump involved in that. We don't actually know because it's all still under investigation.

No, the question has been about Russian interference. The investigation, so far, doesn't have anything to do with Trump at all. He's never been under investigation. The whole thing has been getting into the details about what actually went on.

 

[Halbhh]

What did they hack?

The DNC servers. This hasn't been at issue, and is merely the established fact all agree to.

example --
September 2015 - The FBI contacts the Democratic National Committee's help desk, cautioning the IT department that at least one computer has been compromised by Russian hackers. A technician scans the system and does not find anything suspicious.
etc.

 

[Aldebaran]

The DNC servers. This hasn't been at issue, and is merely the established fact all agree to.

example --
September 2015 - The FBI contacts the Democratic National Committee's help desk, cautioning the IT department that at least one computer has been compromised by Russian hackers. A technician scans the system and does not find anything suspicious.
etc.

Ok, so they hacked the DNC servers. I'd like to know how that equates to "hacking the election".