Hacking issue

[faithful_servant]

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.

 

[Redress]

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.

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.

 

[RickJames3000]

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.

Thank you. This is only a partisan issue because that is the way the Right is framing it.

 

[celticwar17]

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.

Well... there's a opinion/statement about this I can actually agree with. Too many are turning this issue into being salty about Trump winning the election, so it's difficult to have sympathy for the issue at times.

 

[celticwar17]

Thank you. This is only a partisan issue because that is the way the Right is framing it.

I disagree that it's just how the right is framing it xD it's how the left is framing it too...

 

[MrPeanut]

Am I missing something? Is someone blaming Trump for the hacking?

 

[Redress]

Well... there's a opinion/statement about this I can actually agree with. Too many are turning this issue into being salty about Trump winning the election, so it's difficult to have sympathy for the issue at times.

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.

 

[Zyphlin]

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.

Spot on.

Thank you. This is only a partisan issue because that is the way the Right is framing it.

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?

 

[Slyfox696]

Can someone explain to me why this is suddenly getting laid at Trump's feet??

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.

 

[Redress]

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?

No one is not true. Not a significant number, that would be more accurate.

 

[RickJames3000]

I disagree that it's just how the right is framing it xD it's how the left is framing it too...

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.

 

[RickJames3000]

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?

I'm saying that those on the Left want the investigation to move forward regardless of whether Trump was involved or not. Those on the Right are trivializing the investigation for partisan reasons.

That's what I'm saying.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Am I missing something? Is someone blaming Trump for the hacking?

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

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

On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest escalated his post-election criticism of Trump, insisting it was plainly obvious to the Republican's team that Russia was interfering in the US election to bolster their chances of victory.
He dismissed the President-elect's response as unserious, and encouraged Trump to answer questions about the hacking instead of questioning US intelligence.
"It's just a fact -- you all have it on tape -- that the Republican nominee for president was encouraging Russia to hack his opponent because he believed that that would help his campaign," Earnest said, calling it a "basic fact" of the presidential contest.

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

 

[Zyphlin]

No one is not true. Not a significant number, that would be more accurate.

Significant is a bit subjective, but I'd agree that the vast majority I've seen are not suggesting Trump directly had a role in the hacking. Even then, that's a bit different than suggesting people aren't turning it into a "partisan issue", which I would suggest would be a larger number. It's possible to be treating this thing as a partisan issue/in a partisan fashion without bluntly claiming Trump was actively involved.

But the posters claim that it's "only" a partisan issue because of those on the right, and that's just utter bull**** when you have people running around, just on this site, making claims such as Trump having bribed Putin to undertake the hacking.

 

[MrPeanut]

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.

That press secretary sounds like he's having a panic attack. I hope they don't use Trump's dumb joke as some sort of evidence. It reminds me of people talking about Hillary using hand signals during the debates. How are there so many idiots?

 

[bubbabgone]

Am I missing something? Is someone blaming Trump for the hacking?

“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

 

[bubbabgone]

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?

Isn't that just simply remarkable? What kind of filter bubble must some people live in to conclude such a thing when entire major media outlets are dedicated to doing it.

 

[polgara]

“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

Greetings, bubba. :2wave:

Don't you just love it when others, who aren't honest, decide to speak for you? :bs

 

[Chomsky]

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 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!

 

[bubbabgone]

Greetings, bubba. :2wave:

Don't you just love it when others, who aren't honest, decide to speak for you? :bs

Maybe he was joshing.

 

[celticwar17]

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.

Maybe the few reasonable ones... but I definitely would not say the "vast" majority.

 

[RickJames3000]

Isn't that just simply remarkable? What kind of filter bubble must some people live in to conclude such a thing when entire major media outlets are dedicated to doing it.

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?

 

[celticwar17]

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.

My anecdotal evidence from facebook/twitter posts and liberal media talk shows, i've seen a good bit. I'm not going to go through the effort and do a study on the statistics of such a thing, i don't think it's worth that...

 

[RickJames3000]

Maybe the few reasonable ones... but I definitely would not say the "vast" majority.

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.

 

[KLATTU]

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?