U.S. report on Russian hacking released.

[Grenz]

Well, perhaps that's why nothing should be done about it. How can the U.S. point the finger at Russians when they do the same thing?

You're effectively siding with Russia on this. The CIA is responsible for some atrocities, no doubt. But that now makes it ok for Russia to actively and aggressively try to influence your elections? Doesn't deserve anything more than a shoulder shrug? What if the shoe was on the other foot and their favored candidate was Clinton and not Trump?

 

[Blackened]

.
& @Blackened

Let me be clear, because I think my posts have confused some people.
The report doesn't say that RT hacked the DNC or Podesta, etc.
The report regurgitates what has already been released: that they think Russia hacked these orgs via secondary sources (ie Guccifer 2.0).
They don't provide any more details on this than have already been released.

What the report does do is focus the bulk of its findings on RT and how Russia has used their YouTube channel to brainwash American's into finding Clinton unfavorable.

Yeah I read it and was unimpressed.

 

[TheStruggle]

No, it wasn't. Read the report.

Reading it, I'm not seeing any proof on hacking. "They believe" isn't proof

 

[HereticBD]

Seems like a whole lot of nothing.

 

[Blackened]

You're effectively siding with Russia on this. The CIA is responsible for some atrocities, no doubt. But that now makes it ok for Russia to actively and aggressively try to influence your elections? Doesn't deserve anything more than a shoulder shrug? What if the shoe was on the other foot and their favored candidate was Clinton and not Trump?

I'm still pissed that the MSM was colluding with the Clinton campaign and they set Bernie up for failure.

And they still spew this "white privledge" nonsense even when black people are rioting in the streets/torturing/beating white people, cover for ISIS, try to push refugee and Islamic immigration etc.

They can burn for all I care. Honestly, I need a Pinochet. Trump is nice, but I really want a Pinochet.

 

[TheStruggle]

You're effectively siding with Russia on this. The CIA is responsible for some atrocities, no doubt. But that now makes it ok for Russia to actively and aggressively try to influence your elections? Doesn't deserve anything more than a shoulder shrug? What if the shoe was on the other foot and their favored candidate was Clinton and not Trump?

Why do people who attack Russia, outright ignore what the DNC did to influence our elections??? The DNC had WAY more influence over our elections than Russia did and I dare someone to tell me otherwise. The whole angle of blaming Russia is too take all the heat off the DNC and how they were colluding with our media to election Hillary Clinton.

 

[BVG]

If Russia was responsible for exposing Shillary's lies and corruption...to that I will say

THANK YOU!

Let's not ignore the fact that most of the damage came when running against Bernie. THe only reason she won against him was because the DNC is corrupt as fuck and wished it so.

 

[Blackened]

Why do people who attack Russia, outright ignore what the DNC did to influence our elections??? The DNC had WAY more influence over our elections than Russia did and I dare someone to tell me otherwise. The whole angle of blaming Russia is too take all the heat off the DNC and how they were colluding with our media to election Hillary Clinton.

This^

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I think suppressing antagonistic foreign propaganda designed to undermine our democracy probably doesn't get a whole lot of protection as "freedom of press"

In my formative days the left used to champion free speech. Sad when hard-line Democrats like yourself label facts and truth as propaganda while advocating censorship.

 

[ncordless]

We like our propaganda home grown.

Well, yeah. We prefer not to have hostile foreign governments spying on us and/or have their propaganda arm trying to meddle in our democratic process. Is that really that strange to you?

 

[ncordless]

In my formative days the left used to champion free speech. Sad when hard-line Democrats like yourself label facts and truth as propaganda while advocating censorship.

Freedom of speech does not mean, and has never meant, that we are unable to protect ourselves from hostile foreign propaganda designed to harm us.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Freedom of speech does not mean, and has never meant, that we are unable to protect ourselves from hostile foreign propaganda designed to harm us.

Go on.

 

[Teppodama]

I have the opinion that Assange hates America. Nowhere did I reword an argument you made.

One could as easily say that Assange doesn't hate America perse as much as he hates the actions of our government. Now you may argue what then is the difference and I would say I guess I'm not sure because the current opposition to the incoming Trump government means an awful lot of Americans apparently hate America too.

 

[WiolentOne]

Libs should be thanking Russia for exposing that scumbag.

Remember, government transparency is a good thing. We need more of it.

#Freedomofinformation
#thetruthwillsetyoufree
#maga

 

[ncordless]

Go on.

So, for instance, even if NAZI Germany in WWII wanted to broadcast a radio show dedicated to how awesome Hitler is, it doesn't mean that the freedom of speech protected by the first amendment requires the government to let them do it.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

One could as easily say that Assange doesn't hate America perse as much as he hates the actions of our government. Now you may argue what then is the difference and I would say I guess I'm not sure because the current opposition to the incoming Trump government means an awful lot of Americans apparently hate America too.

Fair enough. I think Assange is just as scummy as those whose secrets he divulges if not more so.

 

[BruceLeeOnTRT]

RT is one of the dozen plus news sites that I check daily, and I thought their coverage of the US election was less biased than CNN/fox/msnbc/Breitbart, etc.

They did run a lot of stories that exposed Hillary's corruption, but I know that they covered Trump's negative moments in depth as well.

The idea that RT was what caused Hillary to lose is a bit funny though. They're a powerhouse in Europe, but they get almost no viewership in America, save for some hotels here and there. The idea that their reporting on Hillary's corruption is what made Democrats lose ACROSS THE BOARD, even on things that didn't concern Hillary...

This makes me very optimistic about 2020. These guys haven't learned from their mistakes, and will lose again.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Of course they tried to influence the election. Tell me something we shouldn't have expected? Conflating this BS with "hacking" and the Trump victory, and "fake news" is al designed to undermine Trumps victory and distract away from how corrupt and shitty Hillary was.

 

[chardog]

Even if true: They undermined faith in the democratic process by showing that there was collusion in the democratic process.

Quick! Someone shoot the messenger!

I mean, if I tell North Koreans that Kim Jong Un isn't the tallest man in the world am I doing something wrong? If it was the Russians, they have my thanks!

hehe, the whistleblowers use to be so cool at one time.

computer science is a definitive science, so I dont get why you have "high" vs "medium" confidence. I mean I can have high confidence on the origination of a bug, but I dont know exactly what it is till I run the debugger.... back to best guesses?

consider these alleged hackers did a bunch of stuff in the past and were never caught red handed, will they now?

 

[Teppodama]

Freedom of speech does not mean, and has never meant, that we are unable to protect ourselves from hostile foreign propaganda designed to harm us.

To harm us... by helping Trump to get elected? I assume that is the harm you have in mind. But what if a voter believes that foreign financing to help get Hillary elected is also harmful action on the part of foreign nationals or governments. It would really depend on your preferred outcome wouldn't it.

As for the harmful propaganda, both sides utilized it. Podestas emails vs Trumps audio tape. Hillary's comments both public and in elite paid engagements vs Trumps past comments regarding women. Pay to play accusations against Hillary vs female allegations against Trump. Inquiries about the Clinton foundation vs Trump university. Etc...