The scope of russian hacking has been fairly extensive NYT

Forums:

For some reason I cant copy and paste the address, but... did anyone read the NYT times today? They have a really well written piece on the hacking of the DNC and the rest of the government. Its breadth is fairly substatial, and funny how a typo created a lot of it. They managed to phish for access and ultimately penetrated the DNC, state dept, pentagon, white house, and various DNC congressional accounts. They not only worked to sabotage Clinton, they were active in state elections as well. This seems to have been a strategy employed all over europe to destabilize western democracies. Really adds something to the whole Trump asking the Russians to infiltrate our elections, considering we know now his campaign was working with the russians. This douche shouldnt have won the presidency. He should have won a prison sentence for knowingly being a accomplice to espionage. 

You know they can trace your IP, Patrick?

I'd ixnay the easonTray alktay.

 

"Lock him up"

So they attacked Democratic House candidates too?

GOP:  Greedy Old Putin-lovers.

The New York Times is biased

 

cannot be trusted..

 

 

New York Times Hires Reporter Who Sent Stories To Clinton Staffers For Approval

 

Politico’s Glenn Thrush, who was exposed in WikiLeaks emails sending stories to Hillary Clinton staffers before publication, will be joining the New York Times to cover the White House, The Huffington Post reported Monday. “We’re thrilled that Glenn Thrush is joining The Times,” Elisabeth Bumiller, The New York Times’ Washington bureau chief, told The Huffington Post. “He’s a premier political journalist, a master of breaking news and long-form story telling and a stellar addition to our White House team.” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/12/new-york-times-hires-reporter-who-sent...

Trumpkins:

1. Russia didn't hack.

2. So what if Russia hacked it made no difference.

3. So what if it made a difference

4. We won.

NYT is fake news

More reporting from NBC news last night shows direct involvement from Putin to orchestrate what started out as a vendetta against Clinton. It turned into an all out effort to undermine the US electoral system and discredit us with our allies. Its a well known tactic they have used repeatedly in Europe to weaken Nato, the EU, in order to re-establish their control over the old eastern bloc.Its rather fortunate for putin he could find a candidate willing to betray his country and an extremely credulous electorate. You would think the mere suggestion a foriegn government was actively trying to subvert the vote would cause most of the people that would vote for trump to demand military action.. or at least avoid the candidate they were being steered toward.. but nooooooo they ate that sht putin served up with a spoon and licked the fucking bowl. 

What specific evidence do they have proving Russian influence of the election?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/opinion/useful-idiots-galore.html

...

But let’s be honest: Mr. Trump is by no means the only useful idiot in this story. As recent reporting by The Times makes clear, bad guys couldn’t have hacked the U.S. election without a lot of help, both from U.S. politicians and from the news media.

Let me explain what I mean by saying that bad guys hacked the election. I’m not talking about some kind of wild conspiracy theory. I’m talking about the obvious effect of two factors on voting: the steady drumbeat of Russia-contrived leaks about Democrats, and only Democrats, and the dramatic, totally unjustified last-minute intervention by the F.B.I., which appears to have become a highly partisan institution, with distinct alt-right sympathies.

Does anyone really doubt that these factors moved swing-state ballots by at least 1 percent? If they did, they made the difference in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — and therefore handed Mr. Trump the election, even though he received almost three million fewer total votes. Yes, the election was hacked.

By the way, people who respond to this observation by talking about mistakes in Clinton campaign strategy are missing the point, and continuing their useful idiocy. All campaigns make mistakes. Since when do these mistakes excuse subversion of an election by a foreign power and a rogue domestic law enforcement agency?

So why did the subversion work?

It’s important to realize that the postelection C.I.A. declaration that Russia had intervened on behalf of the Trump campaign was a confirmation, not a revelation (although we’ve now learned that Mr. Putin was personally involved in the effort).

 

The pro-Putin tilt of Mr. Trump and his advisers was obvious months before the election — I wrote about it in July. By midsummer the close relationship between WikiLeaks and Russian intelligence was also obvious, as was the site’s growing alignment with white nationalists.

Did Republican politicians, so big on flag waving and impugning their rivals’ patriotism, reject this foreign aid to their cause? No, they didn’t. In fact, as far as I can tell, no major Republican figure was even willing to criticize Mr. Trump when he directly asked Russia to hack Mrs. Clinton.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise. It has long been obvious — except, apparently, to the news media — that the modern G.O.P. is a radical institution that is ready to violate democratic norms in the pursuit of power. Why should the norm of not accepting foreign assistance be any different?

The bigger surprise was the behavior of the news media, and I don’t mean fake news; I mean big, prestigious organizations. Leaked emails, which everyone knew were probably the product of Russian hacking, were breathlessly reported as shocking revelations, even when they mostly revealed nothing more than the fact that Democrats are people.

Meanwhile, the news media dutifully played up the Clinton server story, which never involved any evidence of wrongdoing, but merged in the public mind into the perception of a vast “email” scandal when there was nothing there.

And then there was the Comey letter. The F.B.I. literally found nothing at all. But the letter dominated front pages and TV coverage, and that coverage — by news organizations that surely knew that they were being used as political weapons — was almost certainly decisive on Election Day.

So as I said, there were a lot of useful idiots this year, and they made the election hack a success.

...

Posting fake news from the Washington Post and NYT doesn't make it true. LOL

The most important thing is the truth..

 

the Russians didn't create falsehoods or fake news.

 

the truth is - 

 

Mrs. Clinton had cozy and improper relationship with the mainstream media.

The State Department paid special attention to “Friends of Bill.”

Mrs. Clinton argued for “a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders.”

The Clinton campaign was in touch with Department of Justice officials regarding the release of her emails.

The Clinton camp was tipped off to the release of the Benghazi emails.

Mrs. Clinton admitted sometimes her public and private positions differ.

Mrs. Clinton’s spokesman mocked Catholics and evangelicals as “severely backwards.”

Mrs. Clinton admitted she has a hard time relating to the struggles of the middle class.

Mrs. Clinton campaign used Benghazi as a distraction from the email scandal.

The Clinton team strategized on how to delay releasing emails, knowing it was against the law.

 

The truth is that the DNC and Hillary Clinton rigged the primary election so that Bernie Sanders never had a chance..

the lefties don't seem to care that their primary was rigged..

 

the left needs to hide the truth because the lefties are so dishonest and so very corrupt...

 

its pathetic and sad

poor lefties

 

 

 

 

Trumpkins:

1. Russia didn't hack.

2. So what if Russia hacked it made no difference.

3. So what if it made a difference

4. We won.

Pathetic and sad applies, but to those who are unable to understand the gravity of the situation and continue to deny Russian involvement.

Trump supporters are, naturally, reticent and quite possibly, completely unable to allow themselves realize that the system may have been rigged in their candidates favor. As such, by definition, they must deny even the notion of the possibility (no matter which side won). It's a bit like the World Wide Wrestling deal where the "bad guy" gets away with illegal moves while somebody distracts the referee and the crowd goes wild. You know some in the crowd are screaming because of the egregious behavior, but there are also others screaming because they think it'ss great or don't think it was wrong. (Trump supporters).

Not only have all of our intelligence agencies united on this, but several of the old Soviet states (Georgia, Latvia, Ukraine, etc.) have been telling us for years that Putin did the same and more to them as well. You can see them on TV telling us now "we told you so". (yeah, but Hillary......)

The only person and people in the US NOT conceding any of this is Trump, his team and supporters. They are actually believing Vladimir Putin over our intelligence agencies (non-partisan by definition) and the rest of the free world. F'n fascinating.

To do so, you must believe that Putin, after years of KGB work, after crafting and executing a plan to take Russia over again after his 1st run, after putting down descent in Russia, after working against the US in virtually every world project, after joining forces with Assad and having HIS planes destoy hospitals and kill civilians in Syria is actually a nice guy who's "misunderstood".

Wake up folks, dude is working to erode US power and credibility. He is positioning himself to start to take over more and more of those old Soviet states to "put the band back together". The world struggled with a proper response when he took over Crimea and began f'n with Ukraine. What do you reasonably think a Trump administration does after it removes the sanctions put on by us after those actions and then marches into some of these other old Soviet states?

We need to delay the electoral college vote until we can figure out what in the hell is going on.

Cornbread, you are right. "I Markd (not MarkD), do hereby, formally call for a full and absolute delay of the electoral college vote until we can figure out what in the hell is going on"

Can I get the lamestream media who has been so mean to me to take this and make it a major news push for the next 24+ hours?