Trump Concedes it Was the Russians... Now What?

[EverCurious]

I'll take a link to how they managed to get through the virtual IPs and TOR maze. So far all I've seen is "we believe" and "we think."

I agree, we should /all/ be privy to the evidence. Where the hell is it, and why do they need three tries to convince us that they know what they're doing? They've put out two swings and two misses so far.

Trump has not admitted anything that I've seen. In fact, he was basically saying the opposite on Saturday, rather blatantly indicating that he'd be lifting the sanctions.

And you who has no knowledge from the looks of it think you know better as well. Funny how that works.

Again, so it's okay if Russian's suffer because of assumptions and guesses, even though you claim that it's better to let 100 criminals go to save 1 innocent, here even if we make the leap that the Russian government is involved, we're probably talking about 50 people vs the economic effects upon the entire country's population - but that's okay, fuck em! Hypocritical as I said.

Yes, I am registered with MENSA.

 

[Art__Allm]

Ok then..so the DNC emails were damaging...

They are incriminating, Killary and her crime gang may go to jail because their criminality was exposed.

...so you admit they influenced the election with their release. End of story. Thanks for playing.

The invented stories about Trump molesting some ugly women also influenced the election, but these ugly women will be sued for their lies.

Can you see the difference?

BTW, what has Russia to do with the criminality of Killary and her staff?

Did Russians bribe Killary?
Are there Russian citizens among her donors?

And last but not least:

Is there any evidence that the attempts of hackers with Russian IP-Addresses had something to do with Killary's emails, leaked to Assange?

No, of course not!

The probable source of the leak was Seth Rich, an employee of DNC.

Is there any evidence that this guy was a Russian citizen or agent?

No, it is more probable that he was killed by ; the criminal gang of Killary.

Cui bono?

 

[mudwhistle]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believes Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, though he did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday.""

Trump accepts U.S. intelligence on Russia hacking, top aide says

Trump finally... though not publicly, and by himself... admits it was the Russians that hacked the DNC. So now what? Shouldn't this change his position with Putin and Russia? Why hasn't he denounced their actions? Why hasn't he tweeted about Assange? Seriously... If his non-actions here doesn't tell you something, nothing ever will.

You're a liar. The cyber attacks didn't effect the election....and your own link says it thusly........

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday."


​

It doesn't mention that the attempts had any effect on the election.

You can't PROVE that it did or didn't effect the election... there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise. Simple question I asked someone in another thread... are you saying that the DNC emails weren't important or damning?

You assholes have claimed that Russia hacked the election. Now you say it can't be proved either way.
So

No I've always claimed they hacked the DNC with the purpose of influencing the election in favor of Trump. The findings of the intelligence agencies concur with me. I did at some point question whether voting machines may have been compromised... but that didn't happen and I concede that.

No....you and others claim that Russia hacked the election. It doesn't matter if they didn't succeed. You're just using a failed attempt as an excuse to claim that the election was rigged to elect Trump.
Never mind the fact that the media has been involved in a criminal conspiracy to help elect Democrats since the Clintons came to Washington. You don't seem to mind Americans and foreign governments rigging the election process as long as it helps your side. Hillary was taking millions in cash from dozens of foreign governments.....and here you're screaming like a stuck fucking pig about Russia doing something that everyone does whether there's an election going on or not.
Just shut the fuck up.

 

[Iceweasel]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believes Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, though he did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday.""

Trump accepts U.S. intelligence on Russia hacking, top aide says

Trump finally... though not publicly, and by himself... admits it was the Russians that hacked the DNC. So now what? Shouldn't this change his position with Putin and Russia? Why hasn't he denounced their actions? Why hasn't he tweeted about Assange? Seriously... If his non-actions here doesn't tell you something, nothing ever will.

You're a liar. The cyber attacks didn't effect the election....and your own link says it thusly........

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday."


​

It doesn't mention that the attempts had any effect on the election.

You can't PROVE that it did or didn't effect the election... there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise. Simple question I asked someone in another thread... are you saying that the DNC emails weren't important or damning?

You can't prove the election results were altered in any way. You know NOTHING about law. I can't prove you're a law student either but neither can you.

 

[Iceweasel]

No I've always claimed they hacked the DNC with the purpose of influencing the election in favor of Trump. The findings of the intelligence agencies concur with me. I did at some point question whether voting machines may have been compromised... but that didn't happen and I concede that.

You claimed it but can't begin to support it. And you think repeating your folly enough times will turn it into fact. The RNC was targeted as well, so your claim is just plain stupid. You should just concede you don't know what you're talking about and quit wasting people's time.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Show me the video where he said it.

You think that a journalist is going to misquote someone who said something on television... not a generalization of a quote, but a direct quote?... did you read the article? It says exactly where he said it.

Do I think a journalist is going to misquote someone? Yes, yes I do. I am amazed by journalists misquoting things that can be easily verified, but it doesn't seem to stop them from doing it.

A direct quote that is on video? GTFO...

What planet have you been living on, that you think journalists somehow feel constrained by integrity - or anything else, for that matter - when it comes to the ultimate goal of advancing their chosen agenda?

Reporter misquotes Trump on 'Brexit' answer

Media blunders of 2009
Check out number 9. While misquotes of Rush Limbaugh usually come from his radio show rather than from television appearances, they are just easily fact-checked, and still demonstrate the willingness of journalists to misquote smething they could easily have gotten right, and know perfectly well that other people have heard or can hear, and call them on. In fact, I don't remember the last time Rush Limbaugh was quoted accurately by a journalist. It may have happened, but it's not often.

NBC, CNN Reporters Pounce on Huckabee’s ‘Libido’ Comments; Forced to Issue Corrections
In this case, an NBC reporter misquoted something her own network ran footage of.

I could go on, but frankly, I'm really not that interested in the delusional utopia of "honest journalists" you want to live in.

Dipshit, I posted the video... and the quote was fucking directly from Preibus. Boy do you look dumb?

Not really an insult with much traction when it's paired with topic-hopping and dodging.

You asked a question, I answered it, and you immediately tried to pretend we were talking about something else. SOMEONE looks dumb, anyway.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Oooooh junior has his dander up. It's a goddamn good thing you never strayed off topic. LOL.

As for the topic I don't give shit who hacked or leaked the emails and the CIA may well change the story in a few weeks anyway.

what matters to me is the corruption in the Democrat party. The corrupt ones are those that only care about who spilled the beans.

So you don't believe in rights? Is it ok to you if a cop searches someone illegally and finds stuff to make them guilty? That's exactly the position you are taking here with your comments.

Donna Brazile believes in rights......her right to disseminate Presidential debate questions in advance to one side. How did the Russians make her do that???

Was that unethical? Yep... was it illegal? Do you really think the RNC is a bunch of choir boys?

The point being, none of the information made available to the voters was false, and the voters made a legitimate decision based on the information they had.

Also, you're a hypocrite for getting your panties in a ruffle over "Russian hacking", while simply shrugging off any attempts on the Democrats' side to skew election results.

WTF is wrong with you? A foreign entity hacked a political party in our country with intentions to influence the election and you blame the Democrats. Victim blame much?

More topic-hopping. A sure sign that you know your argument is bullshit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Oooooh junior has his dander up. It's a goddamn good thing you never strayed off topic. LOL.

As for the topic I don't give shit who hacked or leaked the emails and the CIA may well change the story in a few weeks anyway.

what matters to me is the corruption in the Democrat party. The corrupt ones are those that only care about who spilled the beans.

So you don't believe in rights? Is it ok to you if a cop searches someone illegally and finds stuff to make them guilty? That's exactly the position you are taking here with your comments.

Donna Brazile believes in rights......her right to disseminate Presidential debate questions in advance to one side. How did the Russians make her do that???

Was that unethical? Yep... was it illegal? Do you really think the RNC is a bunch of choir boys?

The point being, none of the information made available to the voters was false, and the voters made a legitimate decision based on the information they had.

Also, you're a hypocrite for getting your panties in a ruffle over "Russian hacking", while simply shrugging off any attempts on the Democrats' side to skew election results.

What 'attempts' would these be then?

I don't repeat myself. If you can't follow the thread, don't comment on it.

 

[easyt65]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Your very 1st statement is a lie.....'false narrative', if you prefer. Trump has not admitted Russian actions affected the Presidential election.

You admit that Trump's Chief of Staff has declared Trump will probably take action...then you criticize him for not taking any action yet. Remind me again - who is President? Trump has not taken his oath of office yet, and the President Elect should not take any official stance or act, potentially undermining the current President.

Reign in the 'hate' and think for a minute.

 

[Lewdog]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believes Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, though he did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday.""

Trump accepts U.S. intelligence on Russia hacking, top aide says

Trump finally... though not publicly, and by himself... admits it was the Russians that hacked the DNC. So now what? Shouldn't this change his position with Putin and Russia? Why hasn't he denounced their actions? Why hasn't he tweeted about Assange? Seriously... If his non-actions here doesn't tell you something, nothing ever will.

You're a liar. The cyber attacks didn't effect the election....and your own link says it thusly........

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday."


​

It doesn't mention that the attempts had any effect on the election.

You can't PROVE that it did or didn't effect the election... there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise. Simple question I asked someone in another thread... are you saying that the DNC emails weren't important or damning?

You assholes have claimed that Russia hacked the election. Now you say it can't be proved either way.
So

No I've always claimed they hacked the DNC with the purpose of influencing the election in favor of Trump. The findings of the intelligence agencies concur with me. I did at some point question whether voting machines may have been compromised... but that didn't happen and I concede that.

No....you and others claim that Russia hacked the election. It doesn't matter if they didn't succeed. You're just using a failed attempt as an excuse to claim that the election was rigged to elect Trump.
Never mind the fact that the media has been involved in a criminal conspiracy to help elect Democrats since the Clintons came to Washington. You don't seem to mind Americans and foreign governments rigging the election process as long as it helps your side. Hillary was taking millions in cash from dozens of foreign governments.....and here you're screaming like a stuck fucking pig about Russia doing something that everyone does whether there's an election going on or not.
Just shut the fuck up.

Simple fucking question...were the emails hacked from the DNC damaging to Clinton? You understand you can't win here? The two arguments being given off from Trump supporters contradict one another. One argument says they were damaging but it was the truth so it doesn't matter... the other is saying that they didn't influence the election. You can't have it both fucking ways. This seems to be a theme with Trump supporters to argue out of both sides of your mouth.

 

[Lewdog]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believes Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, though he did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday.""

Trump accepts U.S. intelligence on Russia hacking, top aide says

Trump finally... though not publicly, and by himself... admits it was the Russians that hacked the DNC. So now what? Shouldn't this change his position with Putin and Russia? Why hasn't he denounced their actions? Why hasn't he tweeted about Assange? Seriously... If his non-actions here doesn't tell you something, nothing ever will.

You're a liar. The cyber attacks didn't effect the election....and your own link says it thusly........

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday."


​

It doesn't mention that the attempts had any effect on the election.

You can't PROVE that it did or didn't effect the election... there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise. Simple question I asked someone in another thread... are you saying that the DNC emails weren't important or damning?

You can't prove the election results were altered in any way. You know NOTHING about law. I can't prove you're a law student either but neither can you.

I can't? Were the emails hacked from the DNC damaging to Clinton? Simple question? And no, saying it doesn't matter because it was the truth isn't a viable answer. And no, I'm NOT a law student. Never said I was, but I do have to study laws as part of being a Criminal Justice major. You really can't keep your shit together can you?

 

[Lewdog]

So you don't believe in rights? Is it ok to you if a cop searches someone illegally and finds stuff to make them guilty? That's exactly the position you are taking here with your comments.

Donna Brazile believes in rights......her right to disseminate Presidential debate questions in advance to one side. How did the Russians make her do that???

Was that unethical? Yep... was it illegal? Do you really think the RNC is a bunch of choir boys?

The point being, none of the information made available to the voters was false, and the voters made a legitimate decision based on the information they had.

Also, you're a hypocrite for getting your panties in a ruffle over "Russian hacking", while simply shrugging off any attempts on the Democrats' side to skew election results.

WTF is wrong with you? A foreign entity hacked a political party in our country with intentions to influence the election and you blame the Democrats. Victim blame much?

More topic-hopping. A sure sign that you know your argument is bullshit.

Topic-hopping? What argument are you calling bullshit? I can't keep things straight with the double-talk of Trump supporters. Like father like son I guess.

 

[Lewdog]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Your very 1st statement is a lie.....'false narrative', if you prefer. Trump has not admitted Russian actions affected the Presidential election.

You admit that Trump's Chief of Staff has declared Trump will probably take action...then you criticize him for not taking any action yet. Remind me again - who is President? Trump has not taken his oath of office yet, and the President Elect should not take any official stance or act, potentially undermining the current President.

Reign in the 'hate' and think for a minute.

"My first statement?" His Chief of Staff who is his secretary passed along a message from him. Did you watch the video of the interview? Did you see that Preibus was in on the same intelligence briefing as Trump? Of course you didn't, because Trump supporters seldomly EVER read the articles provided or watch the videos provided but ALWAYS feel compelled to comment on every thread. I criticize him for not taking action? No I criticize him because he wants to reverse the actions of Obama against Russia, and then do the token action of setting up a special cyber-security team. Do you even understand the deflection he is doing? He's quick to condemn the U.S. intelligence agencies and say Putin is a smart man on Twitter, yet when he finds out Putin lied he doesn't say a goddamn thing about it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Should I point out (perhaps especially in this,) that McAfee is not only one of the most recognized anti-virus software's, but the company also specializes in malware?

I know exactly what I did. I also know malware, and programing, and hacking. I'm a bit more informed than your MSM reporters.

You are.... ok.... can you please tell me then, how someone can be considered reputable when they make a decision on a subject without seeing the evidence?

So let me get this straight, you have over a 200 IQ and you are now a hacking, malware, programming specialist?

You mean like the FBI and CIA did?

 

[easyt65]

"My first statement?" His Chief of Staff who is his secretary passed along a message from him. Did you watch the video of the interview? Did you see that Preibus was in on the same intelligence briefing as Trump? Of course you didn't, because Trump supporters seldomly EVER read the articles provided or watch the videos provided but ALWAYS feel compelled to comment on every thread. I criticize him for not taking action? No I criticize him because he wants to reverse the actions of Obama against Russia, and then do the token action of setting up a special cyber-security team. Do you even understand the deflection he is doing? He's quick to condemn the U.S. intelligence agencies and say Putin is a smart man on Twitter, yet when he finds out Putin lied he doesn't say a goddamn thing about it.

1. Trump never said he believes Russia influenced the election in his favor and helped him win.

2. Trump never said he was going to reverse Obama's actions - you even state in your initial statement, saying Trump supposedly said he 'may take actions in response'. That's a helluva big difference from claiming he will reverse Obama actions.

 

[Iceweasel]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believes Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, though he did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday.""

Trump accepts U.S. intelligence on Russia hacking, top aide says

Trump finally... though not publicly, and by himself... admits it was the Russians that hacked the DNC. So now what? Shouldn't this change his position with Putin and Russia? Why hasn't he denounced their actions? Why hasn't he tweeted about Assange? Seriously... If his non-actions here doesn't tell you something, nothing ever will.

You're a liar. The cyber attacks didn't effect the election....and your own link says it thusly........

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday."


​

It doesn't mention that the attempts had any effect on the election.

You can't PROVE that it did or didn't effect the election... there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise. Simple question I asked someone in another thread... are you saying that the DNC emails weren't important or damning?

You can't prove the election results were altered in any way. You know NOTHING about law. I can't prove you're a law student either but neither can you.

I can't? Were the emails hacked from the DNC damaging to Clinton? Simple question? And no, saying it doesn't matter because it was the truth isn't a viable answer. And no, I'm NOT a law student. Never said I was, but I do have to study laws as part of being a Criminal Justice major. You really can't keep your shit together can you?

CJ students do study law, you should know better. So go ahead and prove the DNC emails damaged Hillary. That's how you would go about supporting your argument, not hurling even more puerile insults. Seems to be all you're good for.

 

[Iceweasel]

Donna Brazile believes in rights......her right to disseminate Presidential debate questions in advance to one side. How did the Russians make her do that???

Was that unethical? Yep... was it illegal? Do you really think the RNC is a bunch of choir boys?

The point being, none of the information made available to the voters was false, and the voters made a legitimate decision based on the information they had.

Also, you're a hypocrite for getting your panties in a ruffle over "Russian hacking", while simply shrugging off any attempts on the Democrats' side to skew election results.

WTF is wrong with you? A foreign entity hacked a political party in our country with intentions to influence the election and you blame the Democrats. Victim blame much?

More topic-hopping. A sure sign that you know your argument is bullshit.

Topic-hopping? What argument are you calling bullshit? I can't keep things straight with the double-talk of Trump supporters. Like father like son I guess.

No, you just throw so much shit around you can't keep track of it.

 

[Lewdog]

Should I point out (perhaps especially in this,) that McAfee is not only one of the most recognized anti-virus software's, but the company also specializes in malware?

I know exactly what I did. I also know malware, and programing, and hacking. I'm a bit more informed than your MSM reporters.

You are.... ok.... can you please tell me then, how someone can be considered reputable when they make a decision on a subject without seeing the evidence?

So let me get this straight, you have over a 200 IQ and you are now a hacking, malware, programming specialist?

You mean like the FBI and CIA did?

They saw the evidence...

Simple fucking question... you sit in on a jury for a murder trial to decide if someone goes to jail for the rest of their life or gets the death penalty. You HEAR the evidence provided for you. Sometimes you even hear how the evidence was collected and who collected the evidence. Are you not able to make a decision of guilt because YOU didn't collect the evidence yourself?

 

[Lewdog]

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks affecting the U.S. presidential election and may take actions in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believes Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, though he did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday.""

Trump accepts U.S. intelligence on Russia hacking, top aide says

Trump finally... though not publicly, and by himself... admits it was the Russians that hacked the DNC. So now what? Shouldn't this change his position with Putin and Russia? Why hasn't he denounced their actions? Why hasn't he tweeted about Assange? Seriously... If his non-actions here doesn't tell you something, nothing ever will.

You're a liar. The cyber attacks didn't effect the election....and your own link says it thusly........

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday."


​

It doesn't mention that the attempts had any effect on the election.

You can't PROVE that it did or didn't effect the election... there is absolutely no way to prove otherwise. Simple question I asked someone in another thread... are you saying that the DNC emails weren't important or damning?

You can't prove the election results were altered in any way. You know NOTHING about law. I can't prove you're a law student either but neither can you.

I can't? Were the emails hacked from the DNC damaging to Clinton? Simple question? And no, saying it doesn't matter because it was the truth isn't a viable answer. And no, I'm NOT a law student. Never said I was, but I do have to study laws as part of being a Criminal Justice major. You really can't keep your shit together can you?

CJ students do study law, you should know better. So go ahead and prove the DNC emails damaged Hillary. That's how you would go about supporting your argument, not hurling even more puerile insults. Seems to be all you're good for.

Hey you are the one that likes to use words against people... so no, I am not a "Law Student." I'm a Criminal Justice student that has studied law courses. Big distinction. And if I had admitted I was a Law Student... you would have used that against me and said that I lied about being a Criminal Justice student by now saying I'm a Law Student. So get that shit out of here.

 

[Lewdog]

Was that unethical? Yep... was it illegal? Do you really think the RNC is a bunch of choir boys?

The point being, none of the information made available to the voters was false, and the voters made a legitimate decision based on the information they had.

Also, you're a hypocrite for getting your panties in a ruffle over "Russian hacking", while simply shrugging off any attempts on the Democrats' side to skew election results.

WTF is wrong with you? A foreign entity hacked a political party in our country with intentions to influence the election and you blame the Democrats. Victim blame much?

More topic-hopping. A sure sign that you know your argument is bullshit.

Topic-hopping? What argument are you calling bullshit? I can't keep things straight with the double-talk of Trump supporters. Like father like son I guess.

No, you just throw so much shit around you can't keep track of it.

Wrong... I've never seen supporters of a candidate so often try to use two contradicting sides to an argument to make their point. It's maddening. Either the emails were damaging and therefor their illegal release influenced the election or not.