How Exactly Did The Russians Influence The U.S. Elections?

[Underhill]

Take a deep breath.
There...
Let's consider hacking into someone else's system.
It should be illegal.
But I also see the possibility for good...catching the bad guys.
Sometimes what is moral is illegal.

Tell me....which concerns you more.
The corruption of Hillary & the DNC?
Or the method of its exposure?

The corruption is not news. It's done and over with. She lost. What does that even have to do with it? The fact that the Russians may have been working for a Trump presidency is relevant. It speaks to his motives as our soon to be president.

I make a distinction between doing something illegal to achieve something good,
& doing something legal to achieve something bad.
The latter is worse than the former.
But in this case, Hillarites need someone to hate, to blame, & to link to Trump.
So it's being blown out of proportion.

No, they really don't. Trump is putting together the single most anti government cabinet in the history of the country. Anti public school person in charge of education, anti epa person in charge of the epa. The list of ways he is pissing on everything good done by government for 50 years could already fill a small book. And the guy isn't even president yet.

If you think liberals need this then you are dreaming. Even republicans (the sane ones anyway) are concerned. This could easily have repercussions for them in future elections too. They would have to be pretty dang near sited not to see that.

 

[Underhill]

The underlined claim doesn't match your claim in post #194,
which was "..... The ODNI admits that the Russians hacked both parties....."
Where is this latter claim?

Your right. It wasn't the ODNI, it was McCain who said that.

However they did say they didn't dispute claims of what happened, only that we couldn't know the motives behind the hacking.

 

[Revoltingest]

The corruption is not news. It's done and over with. She lost. What does that even have to do with it? The fact that the Russians may have been working for a Trump presidency is relevant. It speaks to his motives as our soon to be president.

The Russian accusation matters to you.
But no to me.
What matters more is.....
The Dems got caught doing wrong, & this appears to have caused their loss.
The Dems are generally pretty bad at info security.

No, they really don't. Trump is putting together the single most anti government cabinet in the history of the country.

Oh, baby!
Talk dirty to me!
(Didn't expect that, did you.)
But I don't think that's true.
I expect Trump to be "big government" in his own way.

Anti public school person in charge of education, anti epa person in charge of the epa.

DeVos is well known here.
She's not anti-public education.
Just a little to pro-private schools for the left.

The list of ways he is pissing on everything good done by government for 50 years could already fill a small book. And the guy isn't even president yet.

**** can put out fires.

If you think liberals need this then you are dreaming. Even republicans (the sane ones anyway) are concerned. This could easily have repercussions for them in future elections too. They would have to be pretty dang near sited not to see that.

"Sane Republican"?
That's an endangered species.

 

[Underhill]

The Russian accusation matters to you.
But no to me.
What matters more is.....
The Dems got caught doing wrong, & this appears to have caused their loss.
The Dems are generally pretty bad at info security.

Oh, baby!
Talk dirty to me!
(Didn't expect that, did you.)
But I don't think that's true.
I expect Trump to be "big government" in his own way.

I do too. I expect that of all republicans. It will just mean more military spending. (one of the many reasons I have never understood your notion that Trump will be less hawkish than Clinton.)

DeVos is well known here.
She's not anti-public education.
Just a little to pro-private schools for the left.

Pro privatization is anti-public education. The two go hand in hand. Claims to the contrary are good PR, nothing more.

**** can put out fires.

"Sane Republican"?
That's an endangered species.

Something we agree on...

 

[Revoltingest]

Your right. It wasn't the ODNI, it was McCain who said that.

However they did say they didn't dispute claims of what happened, only that we couldn't know the motives behind the hacking.

To "not dispute" could mean anything....don't believe it....haven't vetted it.
And of course, if they don't know who did it, they don't know the motives.

Note....I'm not ignoring evidence.
So far we have.....
- No evidence of Russian hacking.
- No agreement even among US gov agencies the Ruskies did it.
See why I'm not ready to leap to belief?

 

[Revoltingest]

I do too. I expect that of all republicans. It will just mean more military spending. (one of the many reasons I have never understood your notion that Trump will be less hawkish than Clinton.)

Perhaps I've not been clear about my position on the military.
I favor a strong one, ready to defend the country.
I think we spend too little on defense, but too much on war (needless adventurism).
But I've no expectation that Trump will do what I want.
Nonetheless, Hillary is the hawk because she favors starting & continuing wars.

Pro privatization is anti-public education.

Hogwash!
I'm pro both.

 

[metis]

I do too. I expect that of all republicans. It will just mean more military spending. (one of the many reasons I have never understood your notion that Trump will be less hawkish than Clinton.)...

Pro privatization is anti-public education. The two go hand in hand. Claims to the contrary are good PR, nothing more.
.

To the first point, it amazes me that some who voted for Trump actually believed that he was less hawkish than Hillary with all the things he said that indicated the contrary. I guess it's just a terminal case of confirmation bias.

Devos is staunchly pro-charter schools and anti-public schools as she has consistently pushed for the former of the two. We have "schools of choice" here in Michigan, which does create some competition between districts, and yet that has not been good enough for her.

The Detroit Free Press here ran an expose on the charter schools with one article per day for a week, using test results and other facts & figures, and the end result is that the charter schools on the average are not doing any better than the public schools, plus they are siphoning money away from the public schools. Even though the state took over several school districts, such as with Detroit, all we have seen is a further deterioration of those schools there, plus staff are leaving, which is also a trend here overall in Michigan.

So, please don't fall for the bull that some on right right will try to convince you of.

 

[esmith]

To the first point, it amazes me that some who voted for Trump actually believed that he was less hawkish than Hillary with all the things he said that indicated the contrary. I guess it's just a terminal case of confirmation bias.

Devos is staunchly pro-charter schools and anti-public schools as she has consistently pushed for the former of the two. We have "schools of choice" here in Michigan, which does create some competition between districts, and yet that has not been good enough for her.

The Detroit Free Press here ran an expose on the charter schools with one article per day for a week, using test results and other facts & figures, and the end result is that the charter schools on the average are not doing any better than the public schools, plus they are siphoning money away from the public schools. Even though the state took over several school districts, such as with Detroit, all we have seen is a further deterioration of those schools there, plus staff are leaving, which is also a trend here overall in Michigan.

So, please don't fall for the bull that some on right right will try to convince you of.

One place one problem, we here in Idaho have been having excellent results from our charter schools.
https://www.idahoednews.org/voices/12-things-to-know-about-idaho-charter-schools/

 

[habiru]

It's called "national security".

Did you actually read the article because it ain't saying what you're implying? I think everyone here but you well knows that the right-wing hate groups largely went for Trump.

This shows your bias as it is literally impossible for you to know that. And if the Russians haven't done anything wrong, then you have no reason to fear the results of any investigation.

And also let me remind you that many Republicans are now calling for this investigation as well because they know the dangers that could well be involved, regardless of whom they may have hacked into. Maybe you don't mind the Russians or some other country trying to illegally manipulate our electioneering process, but I do believe most Americans do.

And btw, I also am opposed to the U.S. doing much the same to other countries. If we can do it to others, then we better not whine if someone does it to us-- and we have, sometimes by force.

Bill Clinton and George Bush were under investigation for drug smuggling. I remember a retired highly decorated Green beret solider had reported that the CIA were the ones that were smuggling in drugs. He was on a secret mission for the U.S. government down in south America. One day he decided to look what is under the tarps that they were protecting. And it was cocaine. They CIA agent told him if he reported this, that him and his entire family will be killed. And so he remained quiet for a while, and started his own militia with other veterans back in Colorado. He was on tghe show called 60 minutes telling his story, and said that our own government were the enemies. They had brushed him off . Bit the last time that I heard from him, that the government had him to negotiate with those people at the Waco Tx incident. At the time, Bush was head of the CIA. Some says that Obama was a CIA agent as well. And Bill Clinton had the airport built in the state that he was governing, that they used to smuggled in the drugs Everything collided with the crack epidemic at the time. Even a the government down there were accusing them as well. Now, President Trump is not apart of the gang. That he really wants to straighten thing up.
No matter what they are trying to do, that he is still going to be a two full term President.


ARKANSAS GOVERNOR BILL CLINTON
PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
CIA DRUGS FOR GUNS CONNECTION BILL CLINTON and CIA DRUGS for GUNS, and IRAN/CONTRA, NCOIC


CIA involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking - Wikipedia

Special Reports - Cocaine, Conspiracy Theories And The Cia In Central America | Drug Wars | FRONTLINE | PBS

Mexican official: CIA 'manages' drug trade


Prohibition proved to fail because the 18th Amendment was nearly impossible to enforce. Many law enforcers in the Bureau of Prohibition and at the state and local level, were corrupt and took briberies. According to the testimony of Hon. Emory R. Buckner, a United States attorney for the Southern District of New York stated, “Federal judges have told me, and their names I can supply if required, that the whole atmosphere of the Federal Building was one of the pollution, that the air of corruption had even descended into the civil parts of the courts, and reports were made to the senior United States judge of attempts to bribe jurymen even in the toilets of the building.” Corruption - Prohibition

 

[esmith]

Would someone please explain to me why you think the emails leaked on Wikileaks affected the election? Seems that there is a difference opinion among many of the Dem supporters.
The New Weiner Emails Won’t Hurt Clinton. Our Tribal Politics Has Killed the “October Surprise.”
One big reason the WikiLeaks emails aren't as damaging for Hillary Clinton: Donald Trump
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails.html?_r=0

But since she lost the elections it has to be something else other than her or her campaign,

 

[Underhill]

To the first point, it amazes me that some who voted for Trump actually believed that he was less hawkish than Hillary with all the things he said that indicated the contrary. I guess it's just a terminal case of confirmation bias.

Devos is staunchly pro-charter schools and anti-public schools as she has consistently pushed for the former of the two. We have "schools of choice" here in Michigan, which does create some competition between districts, and yet that has not been good enough for her.

The Detroit Free Press here ran an expose on the charter schools with one article per day for a week, using test results and other facts & figures, and the end result is that the charter schools on the average are not doing any better than the public schools, plus they are siphoning money away from the public schools. Even though the state took over several school districts, such as with Detroit, all we have seen is a further deterioration of those schools there, plus staff are leaving, which is also a trend here overall in Michigan.

So, please don't fall for the bull that some on right right will try to convince you of.

I recognize that charter schools are just another attempt at siphoning government money into private entities hands. It's Halliburton for education.

 

[Underhill]

Would someone please explain to me why you think the emails leaked on Wikileaks affected the election? Seems that there is a difference opinion among many of the Dem supporters.
The New Weiner Emails Won’t Hurt Clinton. Our Tribal Politics Has Killed the “October Surprise.”
One big reason the WikiLeaks emails aren't as damaging for Hillary Clinton: Donald Trump
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails.html?_r=0

But since she lost the elections it has to be something else other than her or her campaign,

I don't think it had a big affect, but it compounded what the FBI did when they announced the reopening of the non-case case. People on the right starting foaming at the mouth and some of those in the middle, who may have been on the fence, could have decided to vote Trump.

In a normal election this probably wouldn't have mattered, as the numbers are undoubtedly small, but with so many states so tight, it could have made the difference.

 

[Underhill]

One place one problem, we here in Idaho have been having excellent results from our charter schools.
https://www.idahoednews.org/voices/12-things-to-know-about-idaho-charter-schools/

It all depends on how they are done. I don't know the details in Idaho, but I know in many preliminary cases, the charter schools siphoned off the best and brightest, those with the most active parents, and obviously they would do better than the average public school. In cities where they randomly selected who was sent to charter schools, they've found little to no difference.

I hate to say it, but I think the facts are plain to see. The problem in a lot of the worst districts are not the schools. It's the entrenched poverty, crime and lack of education historically that makes parents and students devalue education. In that kind of environment it's hard to imagine the schools performing particularly well.

And before someone jumps all over me for being racist, I see it around here in poor, rural (all white) districts too.

 

[Underhill]

To "not dispute" could mean anything....don't believe it....haven't vetted it.
And of course, if they don't know who did it, they don't know the motives.

Note....I'm not ignoring evidence.
So far we have.....
- No evidence of Russian hacking.
- No agreement even among US gov agencies the Ruskies did it.
See why I'm not ready to leap to belief?

Except there is evidence. You just don't seem to understand it.

We've talked about signatures before. It is also possible to track the source of most hacking. So there is evidence. The fact that the CIA isn't handing it over to Revoltingest for his perusal doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

It is theoretically possible to fake these things. But it's like fingerprints. Is it possible to cut off someones finger and use to to tie them to a murder? Sure. Is it likely? No.

 

[metis]

Bill Clinton and George Bush were under investigation for drug smuggling. I remember a retired highly decorated Green beret solider had reported that the CIA were the ones that were smuggling in drugs. He was on a secret mission for the U.S. government down in south America. One day he decided to look what is under the tarps that they were protecting. And it was cocaine. They CIA agent told him if he reported this, that him and his entire family will be killed. And so he remained quiet for a while, and started his own militia with other veterans back in Colorado. He was on tghe show called 60 minutes telling his story, and said that our own government were the enemies. They had brushed him off . Bit the last time that I heard from him, that the government had him to negotiate with those people at the Waco Tx incident. At the time, Bush was head of the CIA. Some says that Obama was a CIA agent as well. And Bill Clinton had the airport built in the state that he was governing, that they used to smuggled in the drugs Everything collided with the crack epidemic at the time. Even a the government down there were accusing them as well. Now, President Trump is not apart of the gang. That he really wants to straighten thing up.
No matter what they are trying to do, that he is still going to be a two full term President.


ARKANSAS GOVERNOR BILL CLINTON
PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH
CIA DRUGS FOR GUNS CONNECTION BILL CLINTON and CIA DRUGS for GUNS, and IRAN/CONTRA, NCOIC


CIA involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking - Wikipedia

Special Reports - Cocaine, Conspiracy Theories And The Cia In Central America | Drug Wars | FRONTLINE | PBS

Mexican official: CIA 'manages' drug trade


Prohibition proved to fail because the 18th Amendment was nearly impossible to enforce. Many law enforcers in the Bureau of Prohibition and at the state and local level, were corrupt and took briberies. According to the testimony of Hon. Emory R. Buckner, a United States attorney for the Southern District of New York stated, “Federal judges have told me, and their names I can supply if required, that the whole atmosphere of the Federal Building was one of the pollution, that the air of corruption had even descended into the civil parts of the courts, and reports were made to the senior United States judge of attempts to bribe jurymen even in the toilets of the building.” Corruption - Prohibition

And exactly what does that have to do with what we're discussing? Never mind.

 

[metis]

And the CIA and other intelligence agencies simply cannot divulge how they ascertained what they did without giving away our intelligence techniques. This is why we have to rely on Congress, which I admit is rather scary, but the fact remains that there are Pubs and Dems in Congress saying that there's a real concern that needs investigation, so this makes me feel that these agencies probably have done their homework.

 

[metis]

I recognize that charter schools are just another attempt at siphoning government money into private entities hands. It's Halliburton for education.

Yes, and the technique they're using is Reagan's "starve the beast" approach, namely that know they cannot outright eliminate public schools, but they can "starve" them money-wise, whereas it then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And if our public school system is supposedly so bad, then how is it that we are the number one economic and military super-power in the world? [rhetorical] Certainly there are other factors involved as well.

However, our entire education system should not be status quo, and we do need to make some very serious changes in our system. Plus we also need to take a much more serious look at the issue of parent/school relationships because so many of our children are coming from families that are ill-equipped to handle education, whether it's because of poverty, single-parenthood, discrimination, etc., or some combination of these or more.

And then there's the serious issue of them and even many in middle-class families paying for post-high school education, and the college-debt issue here is staggering, versus being compared to my cousins in Sweden who don't have to worry about that at all as long as they maintain their grades.

 

[esmith]

I don't think it had a big affect, but it compounded what the FBI did when they announced the reopening of the non-case case. People on the right starting foaming at the mouth and some of those in the middle, who may have been on the fence, could have decided to vote Trump.

In a normal election this probably wouldn't have mattered, as the numbers are undoubtedly small, but with so many states so tight, it could have made the difference.

So you are basically saying is that the odds of Hillary losing the election was due to her, the DNC, and her campaign staff and it was Wikileaks that was only the messenger (hacking is still illegal). 10-4 big buddy.

 

[Parchment]

1.) Russia hacked both the RNC and DNC, but released DNC records to Wikileaks in certain times to maximize affect.

2.) People actually believe Russia Times and their constant peddling of conspiracy nonsense.

3.) Russia literally pays people to sit on the internet for the production of memes, arguing with people online, and disseminating disinformation... see:

It looks like Russia hired internet trolls to pose as pro-Trump Americans

Now, whether any of that actually made a difference in the result of the election is another matter. It may be the case had Russia not been involved in any of these things, that America would still elect Trump. I mean, if they are dumb enough to do so under one set of circumstances, than it isn't that hard to imagine they are dumb enough to do so under different circumstances either.

1.) Former NSA worker/whistle blower William Binney disagrees and there is disagreement between the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. as to that claim:
Gap on Russia hacking conclusions between intelligence, FBI - CNNPolitics.com

2.) Most of the unsubstantiated conspiracy theories I've seen recently seem to come from the C.I.A. and pro-Clinton domestic news sources.

3.) Memes, arguing, and trolling on the Internet- what happens on RF and many other forums and message boards every single day. If people are dumb enough to have their vote swayed by that instead of objective personal research then they probably shouldn't vote.

 

[esmith]

Yes, and the technique they're using is Reagan's "starve the beast" approach, namely that know they cannot outright eliminate public schools, but they can "starve" them money-wise, whereas it then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And if our public school system is supposedly so bad, then how is it that we are the number one economic and military super-power in the world? [rhetorical] Certainly there are other factors involved as well.

However, our entire education system should not be status quo, and we do need to make some very serious changes in our system. Plus we also need to take a much more serious look at the issue of parent/school relationships because so many of our children are coming from families that are ill-equipped to handle education, whether it's because of poverty, single-parenthood, discrimination, etc., or some combination of these or more.

And then there's the serious issue of them and even many in middle-class families paying for post-high school education, and the college-debt issue here is staggering, versus being compared to my cousins in Sweden who don't have to worry about that at all as long as they maintain their grades.

Then explain to me why you think this if we are at the top of the list for the most money spent on education
U.S. education spending tops global list, study shows

I suggest that the problem is more along the line of what Underhill said in post #214 than money