although, oddly, you claim that this somehow isn't support for this practice by trump
I never wrote that, but I don't believe Trump thought his words would cause the GRU to carry out a new operation. Trump is obviously kooky and often makes this kind of ridiculous statement. I don't know why you would assume he knew exactly what he was saying in that moment, especially since the statement is nonsensical. If Trump's intentions were nefarious, a private communication would be the obvious choice. Making a public statement would be incredibly foolish for many reasons.
The point was that after trump's remarks, russians hacked sites for the first time. The fact that they had previously hacked other sites, changes nothing.
I agree, except that you started out by claiming that Russia didn't hack the DNC until Trump made his statement on July 27, 2016. The new indictment contradicts you on that.
See what you wrote below:
And then the first actual hacks on DNC/Clinton servers, began [July 27, 2016].
You edited you post after I corrected you, but you still haven't admitted fault.
What you're trying to do, and it's rather obvious, is to move the ball away from any appearance of complicity by trump.
No, I was just trying to call you out for spreading misinformation again. I'm not Team Trump except for the fact that my bets are riding on his success. I will cheer if he's defeated in 2020 by a worthy opponent like Darrell Castle.
The sane can no longer deny that the russian state tried to interfere with our election.
I never claimed otherwise. Again, produce a post of mine in which I claimed that Russia did not hack the DNC/DCCC.
The best you've got now is to try and distance trump from it.
From the beginning, I've said that the chance that Trump knew of the DNC hack in advance is very low. I've got old bets which ride on that in part.
No change here. The only change I see is that you've become more vituperative.
Your theory is all over the place. Somehow Trump was mentioning a previous hack, so this next hack isn't on him,
No, no, no. Trump's comments were in obvious reference to Hillary Clinton's State Department e-mails, sent and received from 2009 to 2013. Clinton claimed that 32,000 e-mails were deleted because they concerned personal matters. Those e-mails wouldn't be available (since they were deleted), so Trump's presumed statement was: Russia, if you already have Clinton's personal e-mails from a previous hack of her private server, please release them. It's a ridiculous thing to say on many levels.
despite you admitting that his calling for it likely caused it to happen, so he's not responsible?
His incoherent statement likely caused the GRU to try to infiltrate Clinton's office domain.
Whether you think that makes Trump "responsible" for the attempted (and probably failed) hack, seems unimportant.
It seems like the only thing you can stick to
I've been 100% consistent in this thread.
is that the article didn't specify that this was the first time russia hacked these particular servers.
I actually did not make this point.
So there is no need for us or the article to specify that this was the first time the russians hacked this particular site/server. You're throwing a fit that no one is making this distinction, and we are all trying to rationally explain to you how it doesn't mean shit.
Not sure what article you're referring to, but it's definitely good to know the overall context: that the hacking operations began in March 2016, while Trump's statement ("Russia, if you're listening...") didn't occur until July 27, 2016. On that same day, a new phishing attempt on Clinton's office domain was initiated.
Bottom line, the president called for russian interference and got it. That should concern any honest American.
Sure, it concerns me, but not nearly as much as out-of-wedlock birth rates or opioids or bloated government or the utter disregard most people have for the US Constitution.
