http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/pol...eport.html

---

He'll just say "wrong" three times and the hypnotic spell will make his cult believe Russia actually wanted Hillary to win.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

So this influence campaign exposed the truth about Hillary and the DNC? Regardless of who was behind it, was the data fabricated or false? I know you libs really need people to focus on who obtained this info, but you sure as heck have an aversion to the facts.


You've got some sort of an obsession about the fact that Putin tried to influence the election, yet not one of you leftys has ever expressed the slightest bit of outrage over the Obama administration openly doing the same thing with the PM elections in Israel where US taxpayer dollars were used to send his political operatives over there to influence their elections. I guess that was okay since it was your messiah doing it, right?

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Not all democrats are lefties.. Some are right handed too..

---

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism


That's you guys.

---

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism'>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism</a>


That's you guys.

Accurate.

---

The obvious problem here is that our IT security was not up to handling a hacking attempt. Every foreign country hacks or attempts to hack every other foreign country. Heck, the US was recording German Chancellor Merkel's phone calls. Whether it was Russia or New Zealand, the US needs to tighten its security. Fortunately this did not involve US intelligence data. There have been other hacks  by both Russia and China that did.


 

Funny how Obama didn't impose sanctions when government intelligence data was hacked, but did when political scandals were brought to light.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Am I the only one who plays "Who started that thread" with themselves and tries to guess who started the thread without looking at the author?

 

I am right 99% of the time.

---

Am I the only one who plays "Who started that thread" with themselves and tries to guess who started the thread without looking at the author?


I am right 99% of the time.

I get surprised sometimes. But the run of the mill is fairly easy.

---

The obvious problem here is that our IT security was not up to handling a hacking attempt. Every foreign country hacks or attempts to hack every other foreign country. Heck, the US was recording German Chancellor Merkel's phone calls. Whether it was Russia or New Zealand, the US needs to tighten its security. Fortunately this did not involve US intelligence data. There have been other hacks by both Russia and China that did.


Funny how Obama didn't impose sanctions when government intelligence data was hacked, but did when political scandals were brought to light.

Even more curious is the fact that back in 2015, China hacked the Office of Personnel Management. A federal office responsible for handling things like security clearances, background checks, etc. The identities of more than 20 million federal employees and contractors were stolen. Network infrastructure was mapped for future attacks. The impact of that hack is far more significant than leaking true information about a corrupt party and a corrupt candidate. Obama sent 35 Russian diplomats packing in a political move. He didn't lift a finger to do anything about the Chinese hack.


Almost every country, including the US, is constantly probing for vulnerabilities and hacking systems. The United States has exerted its resources to influence political outcomes around the globe. Suddenly, when the party in power loses an election they thought they had in the bag, they desperately need to create a villain to blame for the loss. It couldn't possibly be due to the fact that they trotted out the most corrupt, flawed candidate in modern history who was so arrogant that she didn't think she needed to wage a real campaign. A candidate so bad she lost to Donald Trump. Darn Russian hackers.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Can I ask a simple question?

 

What is the issue here?  Is it (A) Who did the hacking?  or (B) What was discovered with the hacking? 

 

Serious question as I see both sides ignoring one of these issues.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Can I ask a simple question?

 

What is the issue here?  Is it (A) Who did the hacking?  or ( B) What was discovered with the hacking? 

 

Serious question as I see both sides ignoring one of these issues.

 

I think hacking of either party's servers indicates an outside force attempting to influence the election. Who did it? If it wasn't Russia, it was someone making it look like Russia. What was discovered?  That DWS deliberately sandbagged to preserve a HRC nomination when Bernie was gaining steam is pretty damning. HRC is shady and ruthless. We knew that. 

 

The fact that Trump rejects and insults our top intelligence agencies is more alarming than the fact the DNC got hacked to me. As is his explanation, "I know alot about hacking." He couldn't program a universal remote. We went to Iraq on bull [BLEEP] intel. He is indicating he doesn't even need intelligence to "know what is REALLY happening" and will act on what he thinks he knows. So basically, he thinks he can do whatever he wants. How did we not see this coming?

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

I can't read it. 

 

Is this another, "We have all this evidence but wont show anyone" articles? I'm actually curious if there's any evidence at all to support Russian government involvement.

---

I can't read it.


Is this another, "We have all this evidence but wont show anyone" articles? I'm actually curious if there's any evidence at all to support Russian government involvement.

There is if you believe our intelligence agencies are truthful. But you'd have to read it.

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-30/russia-s-grizzly-steppe-cyberattacks-started-simply-u-s-says'>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-30/russia-s-grizzly-steppe-cyberattacks-started-simply-u-s-says</a>

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

There is if you believe our intelligence agencies are truthful. But you'd have to read it.

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-30/russia-s-grizzly-steppe-cyberattacks-started-simply-u-s-says'>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-30/russia-s-grizzly-steppe-cyberattacks-started-simply-u-s-says</a>

 

I know what they've been saying. They just repeat that they did it. 

 

Russian phishing has happened for years. We get warnings all the time to avoid certain emails from them. 

 

They still haven't said how they know it's them. The most that article said about evidence was that "Russian hackers" have used similar code. What they aren't saying is that the code is available to anyone in that region. 

---

I know what they've been saying. They just repeat that they did it.


Russian phishing has happened for years. We get warnings all the time to avoid certain emails from them.


They still haven't said how they know it's them. The most that article said about evidence was that "Russian hackers" have used similar code. What they aren't saying is that the code is available to anyone in that region.

Did you read the 13 page report? At some point there have to be enough dots for you to connect to draw a conclusion. The CIA and FBI have far more experience than you or I on this and were very clear on their findings. So again, it comes down to whether you feel our top two intelligence agencies are truthful or whether you too think you are smarter than them. Is there a possibility it was someone else? Maybe. Does it look like Russia was behind it? Without question.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Did you read the 13 page report? At some point there have to be enough dots for you to connect to draw a conclusion. The CIA and FBI have far more experience than you or I on this and were very clear on their findings. So again, it comes down to whether you feel our top two intelligence agencies are truthful or whether you too think you are smarter than them. Is there a possibility it was someone else? Maybe. Does it look like Russia was behind it? Without question.

 

Have you read it?

 

Maybe you can point how they're pinning it on the Russian government as opposed to the civilian hackers in the area because no one else has yet.

---

Have you read it?

 

Maybe you can point how they're pinning it on the Russian government as opposed to the civilian hackers in the area because no one else has yet.

This. Just cuz it came out of Russian, doesn't mean that it's a government sponsored hack. Wasn't it a Russian teenager that did the Target hack a few years ago?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

I know what they've been saying. They just repeat that they did it.


Russian phishing has happened for years. We get warnings all the time to avoid certain emails from them.


They still haven't said how they know it's them. The most that article said about evidence was that "Russian hackers" have used similar code. What they aren't saying is that the code is available to anyone in that region.

You clearly didn't read it. This is bigger than phishing.

---

Here is the full report:

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY%20STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf'>https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR_16-20296A_GRIZZLY%20STEPPE-2016-1229.pdf</a>


I'm just waiting for the Day Trumps taxes come out so we can see his ties to Russia.

---