The court of public opinion has a lower burden of proof then the legal system. That legal system in no uncertain terms is saying that," yes the Russians did in fact do it." Hence the indictments. Indictments that have to be approved by a grand jury BEFORE they can be issued.That knowledge is used by anyone and everyone that possesses it, namely the voting population. That the voting population became aware of the knowledge by way of a crime is unfortunate for the Clinton campaign. Had that knowledge been benign there wouldn't have been a problem aside from the crime.Depends on how that knowledge is used, why it is used and whom it is using. For instance in these indictments the DNC was hacked by the Russian government, lets keep aside that that is a crime. It gave one side an advantage, which goes against the principle of a fair election. But it goes further then that, because the Russians did it,one has to answer the question of the reason they did, something that has national security implications. Even if the answer to that question is benign, the simple fact that it happened, as events has proven casts suspicion on any act by the president and this has consequences for the faith in the Democratic system as a whole. And makes the president less effective. K9buck and so many others on this board are arguing that the question doesn't have to be answered, which leads me to believe that they suspect what I fear. Namely that the president of the United States is compromised.I have a problem with the assertion that knowledge undermines an election campaign.Espionage in an effort to undermine the ELECTION campaign of a particular candidate is MEDDLING in an election campaign. If you don't even agree to that there is no point in having a conversation.Read: Mueller indictment against 12 Russian spies for DNC hack
Seems to me these indictments are about more then posting facebook ads. In fact I don't believe facebook is even mentioned in this indictment. That was part of a different part of the effort.
Well, hacking into someone's computer system is a crime, it's also espionage. How is that akin to "meddling" in an election? And we were hearing about how the Russians had "meddle" in our elections for well over a year and long, long before these indictments came down. So, I'll ask again, how is posting ads on Facebook tantamount to election interference?
That crime has yet to be prosecuted except in the court of public opinion. Saying the Russians did it is misinformation and invalidates the question.
Last edited: