TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!
POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Monday, March 9, 2026 20:06
VIEWED: 244478
PAGE 151 of 170
So here you are, on your soapbox, all alone.
I read the unclassified report.
Out of 26 pages, about six or seven are blank pages or cover pages. Seven ... SEVEN! ... are on "RT", where the report attempts to "expose" RT's pro-Russian agenda, and they go back several years to demonstrate it. Including blaming RT for its anti-fracking (yes, you read that correctly) coverage. But anyone reading RT will figure out their pro-Russian bias very quickly; it hardly needs an "expose" of long-gone information.
And what does this have to do with the election anyway??
They spend a lot of time making completely bogus claims about Russia trying to destroy our "liberal" democracy. (uh huh) and imputing motives to Putin and to other Russians that they can't POSSIBLY know. They refer, without any examples to back up their claim, that Russia has interfered with other elections in the past, even OUR elections. Gee, don't you think that should have come up before now?? In a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't tactic they criticize Putin for NOT saying anything about Trump, and they criticize Putin for saying anything about Trump.
They repeat the same things over and over.
It's like a bad term paper, where about two pages of un-researched material is fluffed up into 20 pages of utter garbage.
But where the rubber meets the road is that they claim that Russia gave the files to an intermediary, who gave them to Wikileaks. In other words, Russia was depending on someone else ... someone disaffected enough with their own Democratic party to do their dirty work for them. That one critical step ... disseminating the emails ... was out of Russia's hands. Without that one person, all of that "spying" would have gone for naught. It seems to me like there was a critical flaw in the Russian plan. If that person had not been available or willing .... what then?
And it brings up a bunch of questions, like
Who is that person?
HOW, exactly, were the efiles transmitted? On thumb drive in person? Wouldn't that make the leaker suspicious?
And if not that way, how?
How did the leaker know how to get in touch with Wikileaks? Was contact information provided?
Why hasn't the leaker been arrested or at least identified?
To tell you the truth, it still sounds like so much bullshit. Yep, everyone hacks everyone and whatever we accuse the Russians of doing, you can bet your last dollar that we do the same thing. The fact of this kind of low-level hacking would normally be treated with a big shoulder-shrug from the intelligence community. The RELEASE is STILL not from Russian hands, and the report has not provided any evidence that Russia even provided the material, or directed that person to go to Wikileaks, or provided contact information, or any number of critical steps that would have to be in place.
And it brings up an even bigger question, one which the Obama administration and the MSM seem to be pointedly ignoring: IF HACKING UNSECURED SERVERS IS SUCH A PROBLEM, WHAT ABOUT HILLARY'S PRIVATE SERVER? The one where Scy State information was commingled with "personal" email? That one that she directed 30,000 email evidence to be destroyed from?
I just kind of roll my eyes and throw up my hands at the lack of critical thinking.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Google "was hillary's email server hacked?" and you will get whatever answer you want, Signym. 99% chance according to Breitbart, which is run by Trump people. On the other hand, the FBI says there was no evidence. Choose one or the other, if you feel that is an important choice.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And it brings up an even bigger question, one which the Obama administration and the MSM seem to be pointedly ignoring: IF HACKING UNSECURED SERVERS IS SUCH A PROBLEM, WHAT ABOUT HILLARY'S PRIVATE SERVER? The one where Scy State information was commingled with "personal" email? That one that she directed 30,000 email evidence to be destroyed from?
I just kind of roll my eyes and throw up my hands at the lack of critical thinking.
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
The important problem is Trump’s reading comprehension of the report, not what choice Trump will make about the report because Obama already made the choice. The report says Russia hacked many countries. Trump turns that upside down and backwards by saying many countries could have hacked the DNC in the USA. See the difference? Trump is creating alternative facts to justify doing nothing. But he doesn’t need “facts”, either real or imaginary, to justify what he will not do.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Maybe RT Has a Bigger Influence on American Politics Than We Think
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/maybe-rt-has-bigger-influence-a
merican-politics-we-think
The intelligence report on Russian hacking devoted an awful lot of space to RT America, the Kremlin-funded cable TV network. That struck me as odd since I don't think RT had much influence on the election. Shortly after I wrote that, I got this tweet:
Pat Bagley @Patbagley
Quote:And this email:
@kdrum Don't think you know how influential RT is among Christian Right, most of whom don't know what RT means
7:58 PM - 6 Jan 2017 · Salt Lake City, UT
Quote:And this from Vox's Zack Beauchamp:
I think you underestimate the influence of RT on the Jill Stein and "Never Hillary" crowd among Bernie supporters. This is only one aspect of delegitimizing the center. A leftist progressive friend who works on Syrian refugee issues was really disturbed by how many on that part of the spectrum think Putin is just dandy.
Quote:Put this all together and you have a portrait of a sometimes Alex Jones-esque "alternative channel" that appeals to fringe elements on both the left and right and successfully hides its identity from them.
The ODNI report focuses, to an almost surprising degree, on RT — the Kremlin’s international, English-language propaganda media outlet. The report contains several striking observations about RT’s reach, message, and proximity to the Russian government.
....According to the report, RT — as well as Sputnik, another Russian government–funded English-language propaganda outlet — began aggressively producing pro-Trump and anti-Clinton content starting in March 2016. That just so happens to be the exact same time the Russian hacking campaign targeting Democrats began.
....During the 2016 campaign, RT aired a number of weird, conspiratorial segments — some starring WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange — that cast Clinton as corrupt and funded by ISIS and portrayed the US electoral system as rigged.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Maybe RT Has a Bigger Influence on American Politics Than We Think
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/maybe-rt-has-bigger-influence-a
merican-politics-we-think
So what? Are they trying to say that the American narrative only survives when people don't get to hear another POV?
It must not be a very good narrative, then.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It is a Russian narrative, chosen to be of most advantage to Russia, and intended to mislead.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So what? Are they trying to say that the American narrative only survives when people don't get to hear another POV?
It must not be a very good narrative, then.
RT (formerly Russia Today) is not talking about tabletop physics where anyone at home could run an experiment involving servers and hacking to demonstrate that RT is falsifying its stories about Russian actions, now are we? Because the facts can’t be verified at home, RT feels free to create whatever "facts" best serve Russia.
To be as blunt as I possibly can be, RT is free to slip poison into its news and commentary. A little poison into the American mainstream can’t hurt Russia, can it? It might even be healthy, at least for Russia, to sicken America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)
RT America on youtube: http://bit.ly/2i6HbLO
Look what I found about Russia using "poison" on its enemies. The metaphor is real. Some enterprising journalist should ask Trump about this. I would expect Trump to go on the defensive for Putin with something along the line of anybody could have done this. Why blame Putin? :
In 2007, the UK expelled Russian diplomats and severed contact between their security services. Much of the West was in an uproar with Moscow. The trigger? The murder of Alexander Litvinenko, a KGB defector who was poisoned with polonium 210, a nuclear isotope.
www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/19/alexander-litvinenko-the-man-who
-solved-his-own-murder
The operation, a British investigation concluded, was approved by Russian president Vladimir Putin.
www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/europe/litvinenko-inquest-report/
The Litvinenko murder was regarded as an extraordinary act because Russia was carrying out revenge in a way that could harm the population of a major western capital. The worry was that it could happen again.
www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/dec/08/russia.topstories3
The tweeting president-elect and the election hacking row.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2017/jan/08/donald-trump-and
-the-bear-under-the-bed
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Captain Bernie Sanders
www.redbubble.com/people/ittakesii/works/24732581-captain-bernie-sande
rs
A sneak peek of Alan Tudyk lending voice to Hei-Hei the chicken in Disney's Moana (2016).
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And the NYT and WaPo narrative is chosen to be the most advantage to the USA deep state, and ALSO chosen to mislead. The analogy is almost a perfect mirror image.
It is a Russian narrative, chosen to be of most advantage to Russia, and intended to mislead.
SECOND, you have to have your metaphorical shitscreen in place, no matter WHO you read. If your worldview can't tolerate an alternate or challenging POV, then you really should revise it to be more durable. Reality wins, no matter what you want to believe.
What this boils down to is WHAT ARE AMERICA'S INTERESTS? For all that you and THUGR and GSTRING and KRAPO go on and on ... and on and on ... about Russia, you seem utterly uninterested in even thinking about the interests of the nation that you claim alligience to (except KRAPO, who is British, and maybe GSTRING who might be Canadian).
Does the USA have an interest in creating jihadist havens across the Mideast and North Africa (MENA) and Central Asia? If not, why do we keep doing it? IF SO, what would that interest be?
Does the USA have an interest in picking a military fight with Russia? If not, why do we keep doing it? IF SO, what might that be?
Does the USA have an interest in provoking a trade war with China? If not, why are we doing it? If so, what might that be?
Once you start picking apart those real questions.... as opposed to the fake crises that get tossed on our TV screens and PC monitors all the time .... then you have to start thinking ... WHO IS AMERICA? WHOSE INTERESTS ARE WE REPRESENTING?
You start to learn about your interests by contrast with the interests of other nations. And you learn about the interests of other nations, not by reading what VOA or NPR or NYT says about them, but by reading ... intelligently ... what they say about themselves. Recognizing, of course, that every culture and every nation presents the most flattering picture of itself.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:As usual, you missed the point, either deliberately or incompetently. Trump said the Russians did not do it. Trump did not explain how he knew this. Who told him? Nobody, since he made up his own facts because, as a salesman, Trump knows what is best for himself at any moment. But he was not thinking beyond this momentary crisis. There will be plenty more in the next eight years. Bush started the same way, ignoring what he was truthfully told about Osama bin Laden during his early intelligence briefings.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:And the NYT and WaPo narrative is chosen to be the most advantage to the USA deep state, and ALSO chosen to mislead. The analogy is almost a perfect mirror image.
It is a Russian narrative, chosen to be of most advantage to Russia, and intended to mislead.
SECOND, you have to have your metaphorical shitscreen in place, no matter WHO you read. If your worldview can't tolerate an alternate or challenging POV, then you really should revise it to be more durable. Reality wins, no matter what you want to believe.
What this boils down to is WHAT ARE AMERICA'S INTERESTS? For all that you and THUGR and GSTRING and KRAPO go on and on ... and on and on ... about Russia, you seem utterly uninterested in even thinking about the interests of the nation that you claim alligience to (except KRAPO, who is British, and maybe GSTRING who might be Canadian).
Does the USA have an interest in creating jihadist havens across the Mideast and North Africa (MENA) and Central Asia? If not, why do we keep doing it? IF SO, what would that interest be?
Does the USA have an interest in picking a military fight with Russia? If not, why do we keep doing it? IF SO, what might that be?
Does the USA have an interest in provoking a trade war with China? If not, why are we doing it? If so, what might that be?
Once you start picking apart those real questions.... as opposed to the fake crises that get tossed on our TV screens and PC monitors all the time .... then you have to start thinking ... WHO IS AMERICA? WHOSE INTERESTS ARE WE REPRESENTING?
You start to learn about your interests by contrast with the interests of other nations. And you learn about the interests of other nations, not by reading what VOA or NPR or NYT says about them, but by reading ... intelligently ... what they say about themselves. Recognizing, of course, that every culture and every nation presents the most flattering picture of itself.
Now that Trump has smeared every US intelligence agency and the FBI, where will Trump be getting his facts? From RT (formerly Russia Today)? And Breitbart? Because Trump does not read foreign news not in English. Or will Trump be like he always been, making up his own facts? Once he is President, nobody can stop him but himself.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, SECOND, YOU missed the point.
This "report" by the FBI is complete political hogwash. There is nothing in there of substance, and nothing I myself haven't posted already, more than once: the DNC, like all government-affiliated servers, is subject to "hacking" by all kinds of foreign agents. So much so that the server was hacked by at least TWO different entities which were apparently operating independently of each other.
How do I know this??? Because the second spearphising attack actually exposed the presence of the first (more adroit) hack. IF these entities were working together, they would have shared information and the second hack would not have been necessary, and nobody would be the wiser, not even today. So, two different entities.
As far as the LEAK is concerned, the LEAK exposed the spearphising email which set this whole thing off. If the hacker gave emails to the leaker, wouldn't it have been better to delete the self-incriminating email?
The report attempts to paint Russia as some sort of mastermind cyber-enemy, but in reality the hacks and the leak point to different parties operating rather primitively and in un-coordinated fashion. Simple logic overturns much of what the report alleges.
And if the report is pointless in terms of cyber security, what WAS the point? As far as I can tell, this whole "report" had one goal: to make life difficult for Donald Trump. Period. The end.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym, it is time for you to flip-flop on this point because "He {Trump} accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia, so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday."
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
No, SECOND, YOU missed the point.
The report attempts to paint Russia as some sort of mastermind cyber-enemy, but in reality the hacks and the leak point to different parties operating rather primitively and in un-coordinated fashion. Simple logic overturns much of what the report alleges. . . . Period. The end.
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
It was the first acknowledgment from a senior member of the Republican president-elect's team that Trump had accepted that Russia directed the hacking and subsequent disclosure of Democratic emails during the 2016 presidential election.
Priebus’ wording did not appear to foreshadow the dramatic reversal of Trump’s apparent Russia policy that experts say would be required to deter further cyber attacks.
“It will take a lot more than what we heard on television today to make Putin cool it,” the expert added. “In fact, there may not be anything that can deter Putin from pursuing a course he’s bet his future and Russia’s on,” said a U.S. intelligence expert on Russia
www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-cyber-idUSKBN14S0O6
It is Trump's people saying Trump has flip-flopped, but you know they are the ones with brains. Trump might forget what has been decided and brainlessly spout off today or tomorrow the absolute opposite because he runs his mouth without thinking.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME