Stupid election backlash

[Benjamin Franklin]

Thank God for Wikileaks to confirm what many of us already knew. As 4merper4mer alludes to, Podesta and the Dems would have gone to extraordinary lengths to deny and disprove the emails to save Hilary's campaign. Instead they gave us crickets. Wasserman-Schulz resigned.

 

It's not really, really, bad if it's factual. It's the truth, no matter how or where it came out. It's a lesson in cybersecurity that didn't compromise national security. If these were false propagandas then I agree with you. The bigger issue for me right now is the false news stories spread over social media. That needs action the most.

 

So how do you rate your level of concern that Russia hacked into our election and released emails, against one side, in an effort to affect our democratic process?

 

You like the educational aspect of Mother Russia teaching us a lesson, I get that. But how about the aspect that another country intentionally tried to disrupt our democracy and our current and next president are seemingly not addressing it. Nor is the media. Nor is Congress.

 

If Rusia hacked into the stock market and executed a few billion in trades, is that OK? Released people's medical data, that OK? Hacked visa accounts and gave them to friends of Russia, that OK? Just trying to gauge where this goes from "really bad" to "really, really bad" for you.

 

I've posted "Putin laughs" in the last few weeks and I mean it. Watching the US, typified by this board, media, and our leaders, chase our balls whining about Trump's Twitter after Russia intentionally tried to (I have no idea if it ulitmately had an effect) affect the election, must make him so happy.

 

And you give us **** for responding to Gator.

 

Does a dialog about cybersecurity and global state actors vs individual/small actors meddling in the election bother you?

Edited December 1, 2016 by Benjamin Franklin

[DC Tom]

So intelligence has no real proof, just feel strongly that they played a role based on similarities and patterns. I can accept that. Do you really think we don't attempt to do the same thing to them? Was this false information they were spreading? I feel strongly that it wasn't. The DNC and HRC got busted big time and they had no defense. It lost them the election because it was the truth.

 

But let's also not forget about Seth Rich. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/wikileaks-offers-reward-in-killing-of-dnc-staffer-in-washington/2016/08/09/f84fcbf4-5e5b-11e6-8e45-477372e89d78_story.html?utm_term=.fe41466edc76

 

Assange refused to confirm him as a leak but singled him out and Wikileaks is offering a reward for his killer's capture. To me, that's a pretty strong pattern that he played some role in all this. Was he a Russian spy? Or is this more complex than just "the Russians did it"?

 

This is the same intelligence community that said there were WMDs in Iraq, right?

[reddogblitz]

"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."

1. Why is this so surprising/horrible? Of course other countries are trying to hack us. We hack them. We hacked the Chancellor of Germany's cell phone for crying out loud. Seems hypocritical for us whine about this.

 

2. So what if they hacked the DNC? During the primaries when Bernie supporters were complaining about super delegates etc, we were told it's cool because they aren't part of government. They are a private club and can do as they damn well please. So a private club got hacked. should we expect the government to be concerned about hacks to private clubs? What if NRA or Hair Club for Men gets hacked?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

You like the educational aspect of Mother Russia teaching us a lesson, I get that. But how about the aspect that another country intentionally tried to disrupt our democracy and our current and next president are seemingly not addressing it. Nor is the media. Nor is Congress.

 

You mean like we have done countless times over the course of our nation's history? How many democratic elections have we undercut with our own meddling going back to the end of WW2? Dozens? Hundreds? Hell, we just assisted in a soft coup in the third largest democracy in the world not more than a year and a half ago... but there are no headlines about Brazil in the NYT, Washington Post or HuffPo.

Where's your outrage for the Brazilian people our nation disenfranchised in the name of big business?

 

Does a dialog about cybersecurity and global state actors vs individual/small actors meddling in the election bother you?

 

It only bothers me when it's a disingenuous and obviously one sided conversation designed to spread fear rather than the truth.

 

The truth is there is no evidence that links Russia to any of these acts directly. In fact there's mountains of evidence that make it quite clear the hacks you're so concerned about originated from within the US Intelligence services themselves.

 

What's more important? The narrative you're being fed by the State Department as they try to cover their own ass or the truth?

 

This is the same intelligence community that said there were WMDs in Iraq, right?

 

It is funny that the same news outlets who spread false information on the State Department's behalf and in turn got the country riled up for Iraq 2 are now leading the crusade against "fake news" being dangerous... without even a hint of irony.

Edited December 1, 2016 by Deranged Rhino

[Maury Ballstein]

Russia is far far away.

 

We should focus more on the Portuguese.

[GG]

This is precious. Dilma getting her dirty fingers caught in a bribery cesspool is evidence of a soft-coup. The evil Americans are again stifling the progress that Marxists are about to bestow on their people.

[Benjamin Franklin]

1. Why is this so surprising/horrible? Of course other countries are trying to hack us. We hack them. We hacked the Chancellor of Germany's cell phone for crying out loud. Seems hypocritical for us whine about this.

 

2. So what if they hacked the DNC? During the primaries when Bernie supporters were complaining about super delegates etc, we were told it's cool because they aren't part of government. They are a private club and can do as they damn well please. So a private club got hacked. should we expect the government to be concerned about hacks to private clubs? What if NRA or Hair Club for Men gets hacked?

 

Doesn't bother you. OK. This would have been news at one time. Curious that the Republicans don't mind that a foreign nation tried to undermine our democratic process and the Dems only mind because they lost. Neither side cares about the foreign actor and instead both parties just continue to feast on each other.

 

And Putin laughs.

 

Back to things that matter: What did Trump grab today?

[grinreaper]

Here, but maybe more importantly, try keeping up on the news for god's sake.

You are a pompous ass. You screw up by not providing a link and then try to blame me for ostensibly not keeping up with the news. That weak game won't play here.

[IDBillzFan]

Curious that the Republicans don't mind that a foreign nation tried to undermine our democratic process and the Dems only mind because they lost. Neither side cares about the foreign actor and instead both parties just continue to feast on each other.

 

The funniest thing to me from the cheap seats is trying to square the idea that our nation can take out Hussein, Gaddafi and Mubarak, but NOW everyone has a problem with a foreign nation undermining someone else's government?

 

I know it's not that simple, but maybe it's not that complex, either.

[GaryPinC]

 

This is the same intelligence community that said there were WMDs in Iraq, right?

Sure, but they've got it nailed this time, right? Seth Rich had nothing to do with it.

[GaryPinC]

 

So how do you rate your level of concern that Russia hacked into our election and released emails, against one side, in an effort to affect our democratic process?

 

You like the educational aspect of Mother Russia teaching us a lesson, I get that. But how about the aspect that another country intentionally tried to disrupt our democracy and our current and next president are seemingly not addressing it. Nor is the media. Nor is Congress.

 

If Rusia hacked into the stock market and executed a few billion in trades, is that OK? Released people's medical data, that OK? Hacked visa accounts and gave them to friends of Russia, that OK? Just trying to gauge where this goes from "really bad" to "really, really bad" for you.

 

I've posted "Putin laughs" in the last few weeks and I mean it. Watching the US, typified by this board, media, and our leaders, chase our balls whining about Trump's Twitter after Russia intentionally tried to (I have no idea if it ulitmately had an effect) affect the election, must make him so happy.

 

Does a dialog about cybersecurity and global state actors vs individual/small actors meddling in the election bother you?

I like that the truth came out. It actually enhances our democracy because the of the opportunity to vote based on honest information. The DNC, primaries included, was trying to subvert our democracy by pushing Hillary at all costs over Bernie and in the general election.

 

How can you not see that? You think that's an ok democratic process? Plus they were pushing one of the most corrupt politicians I've ever seen. What the hell is wrong with your sense of democracy?

 

Is hacking a crime? Yea. Every advanced nation on earth attempts it though. I realize it doesn't make it right, but what's the greater wrong here?

 

If the Russians hack our securities and execute fraudulent trades, that's fraud. If they hack, sell and compromise credit card or medical data that's a couple of crimes. That's very different from simply publishing actual emails online and letting us decide how it affects our vote. And that's assuming they are actually behind it!

Edited December 1, 2016 by GaryPinC

[Deranged Rhino]

I like that the truth came out. It actually enhances our democracy because the of the opportunity to vote based on honest information. The DNC, primaries included, was trying to subvert our democracy by pushing Hillary at all costs over Bernie and in the general election.

 

How can you not see that? You think that's an ok democratic process? Plus they were pushing one of the most corrupt politicians I've ever seen. What the hell is wrong with your sense of democracy?

 

Is hacking a crime? Yea. Every advanced nation on earth attempts it though. I realize it doesn't make it right, but what's the greater wrong here?

 

If the Russians hack our securities and execute fraudulent trades, that's fraud. If they hack, sell and compromise credit card or medical data that's a couple of crimes. That's very different from simply publishing actual emails online and letting us decide how it affects our vote. And that's assuming they are actually behind it!

 

Get back in line, Gary.

 

Russia is the bad guy. Anyone who brings rational thought and facts into this discussion are nothing more than Putin apologists or pushing "fake news".

 

The Ministry of Truth has spoken.

[GG]

 

 

 

The Ministry of Truth has spoken.

 

So sayeth the shepherd, so sayeth the flock

[Chef Jim]

 

Does a dialog about cybersecurity and global state actors vs individual/small actors meddling in the election bother you?

 

No but being a pompous hypocrite does. And the pompous part bothers me much more than the hypocrite part.

[bbb]

Damn. Who derailed this thread? I thought we were posting pictures of liberals crying?

[Maury Ballstein]

The DNC, primaries included, was trying to subvert our democracy by pushing Hillary at all costs over Bernie and in the general election.

 

How can you not see that? You think that's an ok democratic process? Plus they were pushing one of the most corrupt politicians I've ever seen. What the hell is wrong with your sense of democracy?

 

 

 

Bye Felicia

[4merper4mer]

 

Doesn't bother you. OK. This would have been news at one time. Curious that the Republicans don't mind that a foreign nation tried to undermine our democratic process and the Dems only mind because they lost. Neither side cares about the foreign actor and instead both parties just continue to feast on each other.

 

And Putin laughs.

 

Back to things that matter: What did Trump grab today?

 

 

What exactly are the Republicans/Trump supposed to do about this in public? Should they refuse the election win? Would the rationale that the DNC/Hillary/Podesta's transgressions should have remained secret?

 

You're right that they are feasting on each other but only to an extent. That happens in many more ways than cybersecurity.

 

Personally there are parts of this that bother me and parts of this that don't.

 

 

Doesn't bother me:

 

Truth being exposed. That is a healthy thing in society. Its immediate impacts may not always be productive and information may be overly weighted, but yearning for the days when unfair practices were kept secret is not a solution IMO. This is the kind of thing that good reporters should be doing all the time....and to both sides.....but that hasn't really been happening for a long time.

 

Whoever is exposed: if the information is true, the information itself is still valuable regardless of the person it is about.

 

 

Bothers me:

 

The fact that the holder of the information can use it to their own advantage from a timing perspective, extortion perspective, selectivity perspective or any other perspective. Releasing half of the truth can be a bad thing obviously.

 

 

Not sure:

 

That the beneficiary of the information stands idly by as it unfolds. It seems unnatural but I'm not sure what they are really to do.

 

That the "victim" attacks the source or supposed source of the information and never addresses the content. I'm not sure I know the best approach for them either but when James O'Keefe gets a guy on film explaining how to incite riots and the head of the DNC's only answer is "James O'Keefe is a felon", that is pretty lame, but it isn't surprising or different.

 

 

Reality:

 

Russia or no Russia these things are going to be more and more exposed to these types of events. What if a big Silicon Valley Dem illegally hacked into the RNC and found out they were getting direct bribes from Exxon or some such? Is the first question really going to be "What are the democrats going to do to make sure silicon valley stops hacking the RNC"? Really? It is certainly a strange set of positions but technology in a relative sense is much much cheaper than any previous form of real spying in human history. This means that you don't need millions of dollars and an advanced system of human and military capital to end up with actionable information. Any schlub can do it....at least at lot more schlubs than used to be able to do it.

 

It is suspected but not proven that Russia did this...at least that is the publicly available word. Maybe the government knows more....probably. If they do, then they should deal with it accordingly. That may or may not involve a lot of announcements to the public. What's more important is that something systematic get put in place for preventing these things as much as possible and dealing with them when they do happen, but this is a tremendously difficult task.

 

There are so many targets if you are after one person or group. Just think about yourself or any other individual. If someone wanted to expose you for something, the best defense would be to have lived a perfect life so there was nothing to expose. Not too many people have managed that defense very well. People can get at information about you via your personal email, the personal email of anyone you know, your work, your church, your doctor, lawyer, massage therapist, 4th grade teacher, and if you're name is Joe, a redhead in San Diego. How about security cameras in every office and corner store you visit on a daily basis? Gathering information like this used to be impossibly expensive and a rival would have to luck out by paying a private eye or something. Still today, most of what they find on any of us would be pretty boring and worthless, but if their desire is strong enough....we're toast. It's like a gold rush where one guy has a pair of boots and a pan and the other has a fleet of tractors, drills, sifters, etc. and they cost the same amount as the boots. Who is going to dig up more?

 

In my view to ask an opposing political party to somehow come up with a good defense in protection of their rival is very unrealistic but more importantly impossible.

[Benjamin Franklin]

You are a pompous ass. You screw up by not providing a link and then try to blame me for ostensibly not keeping up with the news. That weak game won't play here.

You missed that the US Intel community said Russian Intelligence was the source of the election email hack, and I'm an idiot for not providing a link?

 

Do you want me to source out a link for who won the election too?

 

No but being a pompous hypocrite does. And the pompous part bothers me much more than the hypocrite part.

Try to have a dialog on the election hack. Respond with a baseless personal attack. Well played Chef well played.

[Chef Jim]

Try to have a dialog on the election hack. Respond with a baseless personal attack. Well played Chef well played.

I was having a dialog with you?

[Benjamin Franklin]

I like that the truth came out. It actually enhances our democracy because the of the opportunity to vote based on honest information. The DNC, primaries included, was trying to subvert our democracy by pushing Hillary at all costs over Bernie and in the general election.

 

How can you not see that? You think that's an ok democratic process? Plus they were pushing one of the most corrupt politicians I've ever seen. What the hell is wrong with your sense of democracy?

 

You're putting words in my mouth. Try someone else's mouth out for them.

 

Is hacking a crime? Yea. Every advanced nation on earth attempts it though. I realize it doesn't make it right, but what's the greater wrong here?

 

If the Russians hack our securities and execute fraudulent trades, that's fraud. If they hack, sell and compromise credit card or medical data that's a couple of crimes. That's very different from simply publishing actual emails online and letting us decide how it affects our vote. And that's assuming they are actually behind it!

 

Guess I'm funny this way: I don't want a state actor hacking private emails and publishing one-side of those emails in order to affect our democratic process. That's my point. It's really that simple.

 

Most here seem to take the tack that Russia did us a favor and we shouldn't be upset. Obama and Trump seem to be reading the electorate right and are OK treating Russia jerking around in our election as no big deal.

 

I give a rat's ass who the person was who got wiped out in the hacking. It would have been wrong if it was Trump, Clinton, or Jill Stein who got targeted by Russian intelligence. Does anyone think there aren't a bazillions crappy emails floating around the Trump campaign? Of course there are. But we didn't see them.

 

***

4mer--I appreciate all the thought in your post. Let me ask you this: Do you question the USIC statement that it's confident Russian intelligence, directed by its highest levels, did the hacking and release of the data?

 

I agree with a lot of what you said, but to me, as I've said a lot of times, I find it troubling that a state actor hacked people on one side with an interest to monkey in our democratic process.

 

And of course it exposed a corrupt and bogus Hillary/DNC. Shocker. There was a huge value in that being exposed in terms of making our country stronger but it's totally beside the point I keep making.

Edited December 2, 2016 by Benjamin Franklin