I 100% totally agree that the hackers were either Russian or more likely Romanian who sold gave the hacked emails to Putin. I don't care who released "damaging information" about the *****.
The FACT there was "damaging information" is the point asshole!
Yes by default the "damaging information" exposing one candidate will help the candidate who did not have any "damaging information" to expose.
One and one make two!
The FBI REPEATEDLY warned the DNC that their email server was in danger of being hacked. The 'man-buns' in Hillary's campaign hired to keep the DNCs emails from being hacked REFUSED to allow the FBI experts come in and put up up-to-date firewalls.
Blame the ***** Rooy Mook and Hillary for their **** up. NOT the Russians or Trump.
The hacking was a crime.
It was perpetrated by a foreign govt with the intention of influencing our electoral process. It worked.
Why on Earth would you accept that type of attack on our system? Will an equivalent attack on a Republican candidate be required before you find fault with the tactic?
1) Hacking IS a crime, and as such, should be investigated. However, the information provided in the hack was still true, and any votes cast on the basis of that information are still valid, which means the election itself is still valid.
2) If you're going to take the position that the left seems to be taking, which is that any election where voters listen to information other than that put out directly by the campaigns themselves is invalidated and should be replaced by the will of the political left, you're going to have a very hard sell. You let us know how that works out for you.
3) If nothing else, the hacks definitely demolished every argument the left had been trying to make about how the lackadaisical attitude of Hillary and her cronies toward computer security was no big deal.
4) You can scream, "And a foreign government did it! We KNOW they did!" until your face turns blue, but the fact remains that the evidence so far still doesn't indicate exactly who was responsible. Hence the investigation.
5) Did you know that "investigation" does NOT mean "simply assuming the left's narrative is correct"?
Here comes PC's henchmen. I will do this once. I'm not answering spam posts. I will explain my position for those who need extra help.
It's a simple question meant to encourage PC to further explain her thinking.
We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking. There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community. It is accepted as fact. It is the basis of the counter intelligence investigation meant to suss out the players, methods and motives of the operation.
As part of that, members of the Trump campaign and the campaign it's self is also part of that investigation in an effort to understand the nature and motives of their known communications with Russian officials.
That is all fact.
Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack.
PC seemed to be taking a position that was not possible given that Trump was indeed under investigation. I wanted to know how she believes both could be true and how that would work.
In an attempt the get her to expand on her thinking so I could follow her logic, I asked a simple question. I asked, If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?
IOW, How is Trump under investigation for his connection to something that never happened?
PC chose to not address that question. Her choice.
Now her hit squad is descending on me.
1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.
3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.
4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.
I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.
That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?
5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.
