• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hacking issue

I haven't heard anyone mention the obvious irony that the MSM is suggesting that Russia tried to influence the election by disclosing actual facts, while the MSM themselves tried to influence the election by making up ****.
 
I haven't heard anyone mention the obvious irony that the MSM is suggesting that Russia tried to influence the election by disclosing actual facts, while the MSM themselves tried to influence the election by making up ****.

That's true... allow me to correct the oversight:

Many MSM outlets promoted the idea that HRC committed an indictable offense using her private server.
That was fake news.
 
A better question:

What kind of "filter bubble" must someone be constrained by to trivialize an intelligence investigation into interference in our electoral process by foreign agents?

A better answer:
Demanding evidence before drawing conclusions is the opposite of trivialization.
 
The ones I come into contact with understand that this investigation can't possibly be a partisan issue.

Even if Trump's direct involvement in Russian interference of the election was proven beyond the shadow of a doubt... it wouldn't reverse the election, nor restore the Democrats to power. Mike Pence would become president, which is perhaps a worse outcome for the Left than Trump remaining in power.

I've had direct debates on this very website of left wing people thinking Trump is some kind of Russian spy... I think it's quite obvious this issue is being used in a partisan way, it's to be expected really... the republicans would take advantage of the exact same thing if the tables were turned.
 
That's true... allow me to correct the oversight:

Many MSM outlets promoted the idea that HRC committed an indictable offense using her private server.
That was fake news.

That's another thread topic but since you brought it up, deleting work related material while SofS is an indictable offense.
 
Spot on.



Wait, seriously? You're trying to claim that no one on the left is framing this as some kind of thing that illegitimates or calls into question Trump's presidency? Or that those that are doing so "only" because "The right" is framing it this way? Really?
Yes, it is true that some are.

And it is far too early to validate the claim of illegitimacy (if indeed it ever will be at all).

But if Trump were found to be complicit, he indeed would be illegitimate - no different than when Nixon tried to infiltrate the 1972 election process.

But the possible ramifications here are huge.

The biggest problem Trump seems to have here, is his public lack of concern and denial of the issue. I can't imagine a legit reason for a President to turn his back on a national security issue. That's (national security) Presidential job numero uno!

His cozying up to Russia, calling specifically for their hacking assistance (joking or not), and his having high level campaign operatives investigated and/or dismissed due to investigations into their Russia ties (Manafort, Page, Stone), also is not helping his case at all.
 
A better answer:
Demanding evidence before drawing conclusions is the opposite of trivialization.

Nope.

"Demanding evidence" be released to the public during an ongoing intelligence investigation with geopolitical consequences is the action of a petulant child with no understanding of how the real world works.
 
I've had direct debates on this very website of left wing people thinking Trump is some kind of Russian spy... I think it's quite obvious this issue is being used in a partisan way, it's to be expected really... the republicans would take advantage of the exact same thing if the tables were turned.
True.

But using an issue in partisan fashion does not necessarily exclude the issue may indeed be legit - which is the possibility here.
 
Nope.

"Demanding evidence" be released to the public during an ongoing intelligence investigation with geopolitical consequences is the action of a petulant child with no understanding of how the real world works.

But something made you conclude there even needs to be an investigation. What made you conclude that?
 
But something made you conclude there even needs to be an investigation. What made you conclude that?

I didn't conclude that.
The CIA and other federal government intelligence agencies did.
Obviously.
 
How did you find out about it?

How did I found out that an investigation was underway? The same way you did.

Listen... I'll save you some time here...

Announcing that an investigation is underway, and providing an evidence dump to the public in a domestically volatile and hyper-partisan environment is not the same thing. You're on a very foolish path with your argument...
 
How did I found out that an investigation was underway? The same way you did.

Listen... I'll save you some time here...

Announcing that an investigation is underway, and providing an evidence dump to the public in a domestically volatile and hyper-partisan environment is not the same thing. You're on a very foolish path with your argument...
People have declared that a CIA investigation found that the Russians hacked Podesta and the DNC in order to help Trump and that 17 intelligence groups agreed.
I heard 2 Congressmen start the ball rolling on that all over the place last week and since then it's been often repeated.
If you don't require evidence before believing such things then I would suggest you let your wife handle the family finances.
 
It is not at Trump'a feet, unless some direct connection is found, which is unlikely. It is however important. If hacking was done by a foreign government to influence our elections, who benefited is not the issue, but that there needs to be repercussions, and improved defense.

Gee, you mean like having rules that say that gov't officials can't have their own private mail servers???
 
Likely because:

A) Trump benefited
B) Trump constantly has praised Putin
C) Trump essentially encouraged it when he said, “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”


With that said, I've long held that the e-mail hacking can only be a problem if there is something in the e-mail that is a problem. For that, that's all on Clinton's campaign.

And with THAT said, I don't think it was Clinton's private e-mail server that got hacked. I believe it was the DNC who got hacked and John Podesta's Gmail account which was hacked. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that's the case. So I THINK you have a few of your facts wrong.

I keep hearing that, but I keep not seeing it. Outside of a tiny handful of people, most are not framing it that way. Now, there is some bitterness that Trump benefited, but not a whole lot of blame.

The vast majority of people on the Left simply want the situation investigated. Speculation on whether or not Trump is involved has occurred, but if we don't ensure the integrity of our electoral process for the future, it will damage the entire nation... not just the Dems.

This is the White House Press Secretary implying just that...

Gloves-off White House creates rift between Obama and Trump teams - CNNPolitics.com



There is no way that the President's press secretary says something like that without the approval of the President.

“Mr. Trump obviously knew that Russia was engaged in malicious cyber activity that was helping him and hurting Secretary Clinton’s campaign,”... "First of all, it is just a fact — you have it all on tape — that the Republican nominee for president was encouraging Russia to hack his opponent because he believed that that would help his campaign."
... so speaketh Obama mouthpiece Josh Earnest, the man with the contradictory name - 12/15/2016

I disagree.

It's not at Trump's feet, at least not unless he was found to be participatory.

But it is a high national security interest.

And Trump's desire to deny, not acknowledge, and trivialize, is disturbing. And that's (rightfully) bringing him a great deal of heat. There is some reason he does not want to recognize or address this issue, and his action/lack-of-action strikes many as suspicious - which it is.

When a President-elect refuses to acknowledge or act upon a national security issue, something is up. My hope is the reason will be benign, but even something relatively benign like naivete or political partisanship is a terrible reflection of him.

The number one concern of a President is (should be) national security, and nothing should be more sacrosanct than the security of the democratic process!

The ones I come into contact with understand that this investigation can't possibly be a partisan issue.

Even if Trump's direct involvement in Russian interference of the election was proven beyond the shadow of a doubt... it wouldn't reverse the election, nor restore the Democrats to power. Mike Pence would become president, which is perhaps a worse outcome for the Left than Trump remaining in power.

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 5h

Are we talking about the same cyberattack where it was revealed that head of the DNC illegally gave Hillary the questions to the debate?

LOL- he knows how to twist the blade doesn't he?



This whole issue is being used to attack Trump, when the person who should be taking 100% of the heat is Clinton. SHE opened this door, not Trump. But almost everything you are reading is connecting this to Trump in some way. Clinton did something wrong, but because Trump MAY have benefited from her screw-up, he should be punished for it. The fact that her private mail server got hacked and that action may have impacted this election should blow back on Clinton, not Trump. Yet the narrative being pushed is "Trump is in the Russian's pocket and this hacking is proof of it.", while what it should be is "This is why what she did was so wrong and why it should be seen as a MAJORLY negative reflection on her competence."
 
This whole issue is being used to attack Trump, when the person who should be taking 100% of the heat is Clinton. SHE opened this door, not Trump. But almost everything you are reading is connecting this to Trump in some way. Clinton did something wrong, but because Trump MAY have benefited from her screw-up, he should be punished for it. The fact that her private mail server got hacked and that action may have impacted this election should blow back on Clinton, not Trump. Yet the narrative being pushed is "Trump is in the Russian's pocket and this hacking is proof of it.", while what it should be is "This is why what she did was so wrong and why it should be seen as a MAJORLY negative reflection on her competence."

Nothing is ever Hillary's fault.
 
Can someone explain to me why this is suddenly getting laid at Trump's feet?? The standards of not allowing gov't officials to set up their own email servers is predicated on preventing this kind of thing from happening. Whether it was the Russians, Anonymous, or Bob in Wagontire, OR who hacked her mail server, the fact that it got hacked should be the issue. Trump benefiting from the hacking is a relatively minor issue compared to the fact that Clinton having this unsecured mail server is at the heart of the problem. This is all about shifting the blame from Clinton doing something wrong to making it look like it's Trump who did something wrong. At the end of the day, had Clinton not violated the rules about not having a private email server, there would never been any hacking done. It's like having a thief rob your home and then blaming the guy who bought the stolen goods and sold them at profit (not knowing they were stolen) for the crime. Yes, Trump benefited form the hacking. Yes, whoever hacked Clinton's server did it to try to keep her out of office. But that does NOT mean that Trump is guilty of anything. Until you can show that Trump was an active party in this hacking, then all this crap getting thrown around (innuendo, guilt by association, etc.) means NOTHING and Clinton's issue of setting up this private server is even more important.

Personally, I think that there's a large measure of karma in this whole issue. Clinton kept telling us that the private server was no big deal, yet it was a big part of what cost her this election. Had she followed the rules, things may have turned out differently for her.

I think the left would have no reason to lay this at Trump's feet if he hadn't foolishly encouraged the Russians to hack into the servers looking for Hillary's missing 30,000 emails. He unfortunately interjected himself right into it. He shouldn't be surprised it's coming back at him.

One of the many reasons that Trump concerns me. I think he has shown repeatedly that his big mouth will get him/us in trouble.
 
This whole issue is being used to attack Trump, when the person who should be taking 100% of the heat is Clinton. SHE opened this door, not Trump. But almost everything you are reading is connecting this to Trump in some way. Clinton did something wrong, but because Trump MAY have benefited from her screw-up, he should be punished for it. The fact that her private mail server got hacked and that action may have impacted this election should blow back on Clinton, not Trump. Yet the narrative being pushed is "Trump is in the Russian's pocket and this hacking is proof of it.", while what it should be is "This is why what she did was so wrong and why it should be seen as a MAJORLY negative reflection on her competence."

Of course that's true.
The whole attempt to ignore the content of emails and instead focus on how the emails were acquired should be enlightening.
To me, more information is a good thing.
 
Can someone explain to me why this is suddenly getting laid at Trump's feet??
"Suddenly?"

The media has been talking about it for months. It's getting notice again because a CIA report on the hacking got leaked, and Trump is losing his mind over it.


The standards of not allowing gov't officials to set up their own email servers is predicated on preventing this kind of thing from happening.
The hacks were on DNC and campaign email servers. Not government servers.


Whether it was the Russians, Anonymous, or Bob in Wagontire, OR who hacked her mail server, the fact that it got hacked should be the issue.
Since at least one was a spearphishing attack -- meaning someone specifically targeted the groups -- yes, the identity of the hackers is a serious issue.

This was not a couple of script kiddies looking for lulz. It was a calculated political attack, not just on Clinton but on the integrity of our electoral system as a whole.


Trump benefiting from the hacking is a relatively minor issue compared to the fact that Clinton having this unsecured mail server is at the heart of the problem.
Or, you are desperately trying to deflect from the fact that Russia may have intervened with our election, solely because it might make Trump look a little bad. Of course, his attempts to deflect are only fanning the flames.


This is all about shifting the blame from Clinton doing something wrong to making it look like it's Trump who did something wrong.
....no, Trump is digging his own grave on this. He is trying to shift the blame, trying to bury the implications in order to shore up his false claims to a mandate, childishly bash the CIA (who have nothing to benefit from undermining the President-Elect), and it only brings yet more attention on friendly his administration is looking towards Putin.

Oh, and let's not forget that he explicitly, publicly and irresponsibly asked Russia to hack Clinton's email servers to find the "missing" emails during the campaign. He will not be so glib when Guccifer 3.0 leaks his administration's internal communications -- or worse, Trump's tax filings.


At the end of the day, had Clinton not violated the rules about not having a private email server, there would never been any hacking done.
<< shakes head >>

This has nothing to do with Clinton's private server, or any government servers. This is about the DNC and Podesta email hacks. Those would have happened no matter what Clinton had or hadn't done.


It's like having a thief rob your home and then blaming the guy who bought the stolen goods and sold them at profit (not knowing they were stolen) for the crime.
Uh... no. The hackers had specific targets in mind, and the entities that released the hacked emails knew they were not legitimately released.

This is more like illegally wiretapping the DNC and robbing their offices for internal memos, and releasing damaging transcripts and memos in order to embarrass the Democrats and subvert the electoral process. Hence the parallels to Watergate.


Yes, Trump benefited form the hacking. Yes, whoever hacked Clinton's server did it to try to keep her out of office. But that does NOT mean that Trump is guilty of anything.
No one is accusing Trump or any of his staff of actively participating in these hacks. No one says he is guilty of any crime.

Rather, he is responsible for his disastrous reactions, which are undermining both the legitimacy of the electoral process, and his relationship to the intelligence community, before he sets foot in office. Heck, even McConnell realizes how serious this is, and wants a more thorough investigation.
 
Can someone explain to me why this is suddenly getting laid at Trump's feet?? The standards of not allowing gov't officials to set up their own email servers is predicated on preventing this kind of thing from happening. Whether it was the Russians, Anonymous, or Bob in Wagontire, OR who hacked her mail server, the fact that it got hacked should be the issue. Trump benefiting from the hacking is a relatively minor issue compared to the fact that Clinton having this unsecured mail server is at the heart of the problem. This is all about shifting the blame from Clinton doing something wrong to making it look like it's Trump who did something wrong. At the end of the day, had Clinton not violated the rules about not having a private email server, there would never been any hacking done. It's like having a thief rob your home and then blaming the guy who bought the stolen goods and sold them at profit (not knowing they were stolen) for the crime. Yes, Trump benefited form the hacking. Yes, whoever hacked Clinton's server did it to try to keep her out of office. But that does NOT mean that Trump is guilty of anything. Until you can show that Trump was an active party in this hacking, then all this crap getting thrown around (innuendo, guilt by association, etc.) means NOTHING and Clinton's issue of setting up this private server is even more important.

Personally, I think that there's a large measure of karma in this whole issue. Clinton kept telling us that the private server was no big deal, yet it was a big part of what cost her this election. Had she followed the rules, things may have turned out differently for her.

Part of the whole schtick I think is:

a. To use anything and everything they can possibly do to discredit the President-elect and/or make him fail. And it is important to qualify that they want him to fail not because of his agenda and goals and objectives but because he isn't one of them. He isn't Hillary.

b. To link him as a puppet of the Russians, most especially Putin, is one of the most profitable things they can come up with to accuse and demonize him this month. The fact that the notion is absurd doesn't matter. Their intent is to put that notion in the minds of ignoramuses who will keep promoting and posting it again and again on message boards, social media, etc. so that other ignoramuses will see it, believe it and step up the hatred against the President-elect. The fact that the CIA won't provide evidence for it or anybody who will step up to confirm it, the FBI strongly doubts it, the fact that Russia denies it, the fact that Wikileaks themselves say Russia is not their source, doesn't matter.

Anything Clinton did wrong, dangerous, compromising, or illegal doesn't matter. She was to be coronated queen and Trump took that away from her. Therefore Trump bad. Clinton wronged victim.

It's as simple as that.
 
It is not at Trump'a feet, unless some direct connection is found, which is unlikely. It is however important. If hacking was done by a foreign government to influence our elections, who benefited is not the issue, but that there needs to be repercussions, and improved defense.

The first line of defense should be SOS should not use unsecured servers, cell phones, or laptops to conduct the nations business.

Regardless of the circumstances, Hillary got what she deserved. After decades of flaunting or ignoring the law. the Clintons have busted twice. Once for stealing the WH furniture, for which they were made to pay market value, and now the biggie. Hillary is not going to be President, ever.

I say good bye bye and good riddance.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom