CIA: Russia manipulated the election to install Trump

Do you think the US should be held accountable for their hundreds of attempts of manipulating foreign elections? Of course not.

Perhaps we should nuke Russia. That will teach them a lesson right? Or elect Hillary so she can antagonize them for another 8 years like Obama.

 

"It did not hurt the DNC. The DNC hurt themselves this year." is just playing with words.

"It hurt the DNC" does not mean the DNC has no responsibility for losing the election. Again, the point isn't to make a case that Clinton should have won. As far as I'm concerned, they made their bed and they need to live with the results.

I'm OK with information coming to light in the interest of informing the public on important issues.

However, a foreign entity selectively releasing information, obtained by security breach, to favor one candidate over another and thereby attempting to influence an election is bad for our electoral process. I stand by that, whether the affect would be to tilt the election in favor of Clinton or Trump.

 

Why do you just now want to talk about this? If we dont want Russians interfering with our political process, shouldn't we leave Russia and every other country's political process alone?

I know I know thats irrelevant. We are the US. We should be allowed to do whatever we want with no repercussions and get angry if someone does it to us. #ImNotABully

 

"I think they did interfere with our elections — and I want Putin personally to pay a price." ~ Lindsey Graham

I've been talking about this. I was in the last thread about this that CometsWin started...

As for other countries and we doing it to them, I mean are we talking about recently? What incident are you speaking of specifically? I just don't get the argument you are making, it's like yeah we did Nagasaki and Hiroshima...does not mean it's tolerable for another country to nuke us.

 

What you're not understanding is this should be expected. Russia is not our ally. They owe nothing to us. This is why politicians should run a tight ship. What are we going to do to Russia? Attack them? Our current administration continues to antagonize them.

There are many bad things for our electoral process. One of them is colluding with the media. Or letting Wall Street decide who the candidate will run on certain party tickets. Or manipulating sound clips to produce the complete opposite message.

Our own campaigning strategies is a bigger threat to our political process than a few wikileak dumps.

 

You're right that this is how countries behave, and we are one of the culprits. We don't have to like it.

In my view, it's less about getting angry at Russia for daring to do it, then it is to analyze the scope of the problem and take the necessary steps to prevent it from impacting our elections in the future.

 

So SpaceGhost, you are basically just fine with what happened? It's okay, if so, but just say it if you have no problem with Russia having a strong preference in our election and illegally hacking to do what they could to promote a certain outcome.

You favored the Republican candidate, and I have to wonder if you would also be shrugging if Russia had gone all in for HRC and she had won the E.C. I assume in that case, even if you claim you'd be fine with that outcome, that you'd really want to understand the ties between Clinton and Russia though.

I'm not asking if we do meddle in overseas elections. We do all sorts of things I don't approve of. I do care more about American elections than I do about those in other countries, however.

 

Seriously dude? WAKE UP. Why do you think Russia and the US are at odds now? One of the reasons is what government should be in control of Syria.

I know you wont bother reading, but here is a starter list. A simple google search will give you troves.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...-doesnt-feel-good_us_57983b85e4b02d5d5ed382bd

 

Obama mocked Romney when he said Russia was a threat! And Hillary was supposed to have reset relations! Total naive clowns, both of them.

 

I don't like other countries interfering with our own affairs, but I'd be naive to believe it doesn't happen. I'd also be a hypocrite to be outraged at it when my country constantly interferes with other countries.

The only thing we can do is run a tighter ship like durvasa said. We can't blame other countries for looking for their interests when we do the same.

 

Number of votes cast by Russia: zero. Hillary still lost! Tears

 

Well, I wanted you to give me an example so that we can discuss that example and how similar it is to this. So Syria for example, US is and has always been against war crimes and protecting the rights of people all around the globe. So, is the situation similar? I don't think it is, some people should not be in power and if it takes an outside force to get said person out of power, so be it.

 

Another thing to add is that making a stink about it now, after your candidate lost, looks like it's sour grapes.

 

Am I ok with it? No. Just as I am not ok with Hillary and the DNC colluding with the media, which is MUCh worse than this single incident we are discussing at hand.

Lets get one thing clear; Every country on this planet has a preference, strong or weak. The term preference is irrelevant.

The point is, its expected and its something you're not coming to terms with. Its nothing new. It doesn't matter if the manipulation comes from an electronic form or sending operatives into our country to disrupt the system or buying off politicians or whatever creative manner one can come up with. Its always happened in the past, the present and the future. Its called .... politics.

You're making a not-so-subtle allegation that there are ties between Trump and Putin. These are allegations with no proof. Just as there are allegations about the Clinton foundation and Clintons and China with no solid proof.

And quite frankly, if a foreign country feels compelled to expose the corruption in our system, I will not be happy they compromised our system, but I will be appreciative of the information we do get.

Russia: We have illegally obtained proof of unethical behavior in your political process
Liberals: How dare you expose our corruption.

 

But that's the thing, the Democratic party has been making a stink of this before a single ballot was cast.

 

Let me get this straight.

Exposing an unethical political party (DNC) is far more damaging than bombing and killing people in a 3rd world country because we stated their leaders are guilty of war crimes.

This reminds me of a very familiar circumstance little over a decade ago. Should I safely say you were ok with the Iraq war? Which left a huge void for ISIS to form? And this same region has more killings than ever before? Which will happen when Assad is ousted.

Yes, what Russia did was so much worse.

 

The thread responses in this are interesting. There seems to be a general consensus that this is true and that Clinton should still concede so what will be the likely response from the Trump administration? Let's look at what we know:

What department handles cybersecurity, Homeland Security? Trump's cabinet pick, John F. Kelly, is reportedly being brought on to help with border issues so I think it's more helpful to look elsewhere. I think the cybersecurity czar (who, from what I understand, has no real power) works with private companies, the DOD, FBI and NSA on those matters so lets' look at those early appointments:

DOD - Mattis: Advocates force only when its necessary and successful. He has a background in silicon valley as well. This is probably the most important department to look at because Trump has indicated that he's going to take a more hardline approach when it comes to cybersecurity. Mattis seems competent and is nothing if not a hardliner.

FBI - N/A

NSA - Flynn: Uh Oh. Flynn supports using cyber weapons. He also likes to believe in nonsense. To be fair, he did say that it made sense in October that Russia would try to meddle in the election.
Dep. K.T. Mcfarland: "I will be a foot soldier for the Trump revolution" - in other words, she'll fall in line w/ whatever they decide to do. Republicans don't usually tolerate dissent.

CIA- Pompeo: Well respected on both sides of the aisle but did politicize the Benghazi hearings so he's likely to sweep this under the rug. As usual w/ Trumps picks, I'm more concerned about competence and experience in these positions and it's heartening to hear that he's a good listener.

SBA- Wrestle lady: N/A

Then we have the man at the top and he has already expressed doubt that Russia was hacking these emails and that's concerning. But this is just speculation. The SOS pick isn't in yet (is it?) but Romney would clearly be a good choice since he clearly takes none-state and, now apparently, state actors very seriously.

It's a state actor attempting to subvert the will of the people in our democracy, fellas. Just because your OK with the results doesn't mean something shouldn't be done about it.

 

I think it was heavily suspected but now it's finally confirmed. I don't think it would've mattered to the voting base, honestly. Americans would be more concerned with the corruption in its own system than the interference from Russia.

It's just another lesson learned to keep security tight.

 

How absurdly naive do you have to be to believe that Russia is just trying to expose unethical behavior? They likely hacked the RNC too and are holding onto that information in order to blackmail Republican leadership. I'm guessing at that point you'll suddenly care about this issue, but in the meantime you (and many others) are going to carry on with your absolute obsession with Hillary Clinton and the DNC and using them as justification for not giving a **** about a foreign power meddling with our election process.

 

No, it's not more damaging but WE didn't just state that, the UN and other countries did as well. So don't put that just on the USA.

If you told me the US had an opportunity to displace Kim Jong Un I'd say they should take it because what is happening to those people is terrifying and I'd rather give them hope of building their own democracy than just leaving them there to be bullied and treated like garbage by their own leader. If it means that 20 years from now a more maniacal dictator is now holding the crown well...get rid of that dude too. If the USA is going to play the role of the world's police then it shouldn't be afraid of knocking out bad parties because a badder party will fill the void. That's like not arresting El Chapo because someone else will inevitably fill the void...also I don't think ISIS formed just because of a void but that's another topic.