Russians accused of interfering in election to get Trump elected

[-TSS-]

Isn't all of that deficit in California alone meaning that in 49 states Trump won more votes than Hillary?

[Omni]

1 hour ago, Smallc said:

I thought it was up to 2.8M.

It is up there now apparently.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/hillary-clinton-popular-vote-lead-donald-trump-us-election-president-elect-millions-a7476926.html

[Smallc]

18 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

Isn't all of that deficit in California alone meaning that in 49 states Trump won more votes than Hillary?

No, that would have had her winning only California.

[?Impact]

Yes, latest is 2.9 million (2,864,979)

• 4.3 million in California (4,269,978)
• 1.7 million in New York (1,732,872)
• 0.9 million in Illinois (944,714)
• 0.9 million in Massachusetts (904,303)

[GostHacked]

8 hours ago, cybercoma said:

If there's foreign interference in an election and you're not going to take the CIA's word for it, who's credible enough for you to believe it?

Give me ONE good reason to trust anything the CIA puts out.

[Wilber]

14 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Give me ONE good reason to trust anything the CIA puts out.

Why not answer the question?

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Give me ONE good reason to trust anything the CIA puts out.

Oh oh oh!!! I know this one!:

Their admission that they've been interfering in other democracies since 1953?

 

[GostHacked]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Oh oh oh!!! I know this one!:

Their admission that they've been interfering in other democracies since 1953?

 

So why are they complaining when it happens to them?

[eyeball]

Because they're flaming hypocrites would be my guess.

There's really nothing more pathetic than a bully who can't take what they dish out.  

[GostHacked]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Because they're flaming hypocrites would be my guess.

There's really nothing more pathetic than a bully who can't take what they dish out.  

Well, that just seems to make sense to sane people.

[Argus]

14 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Give me ONE good reason to trust anything the CIA puts out.

Because they're a lot more reliably honest than most of the wack job fruitloop conspiracy sites you DO trust.

[cybercoma]

14 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Give me ONE good reason to trust anything the CIA puts out.

Answer the question then. Who can you trust on matters of espionage and foreign interference in elections?

[Cum Laude]

2 hours ago, cybercoma said:

Answer the question then. Who can you trust on matters of espionage and foreign interference in elections?

This is nonsense, and I don't think you have even a remote understanding of this issue. Maybe you rely on the CBC just a TAD too much. Obama’s press conference recently was full of the “Russian hacking” issue.The presstitutes on “real news” TV are now round-the-clock involved in reporting on the Russian hacking-the-election issue. That and Aleppo.Blaming Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, for personally leading the hacking program against the U.S. elections (and Aleppo as it happens;) now the FBI and CIA are confirming this.Are these people and organizations insane or simply dumb?

The government of the United States of America has spent trillions of military budget dollars expressly for “cyber-warfare” apart from personnel and traditional weapons systems. There’s even a four-star flag officer in charge.The military organisms are in addition to “civilian” cyber-warfare outfits which include NSA, CIA, NRO and a host of others.

On top of all the governmental activity there are the monster computer technology and research companies, from IBM and Hewlett Packard to Google and Facebook. These companies have leading edge and intimate knowledge of cyber-warfare. Have their expertise not been taken advantage of by the government? If no, why not?

Then there are the leading U.S. research universities – most of which are the best in the world: MIT, Cal Tech, Stanford etc. – or so the story goes. Have they not been (t)asked by the government to help out in the age of cyber-warfare? If no, why the hell not?There is absolutely no excuse on earth (other than laziness, stupidity or treason) that any U.S. government, or affiliated system(s) should be getting hacked. People responsible need to be held accountable (hahahahaha.)

After the press conference, Barry, Michele and the rest of the First Family’s retinue will be going to Hawaii for winter break. No one will be held accountable and nothing substantive will be done about it – well except for plenty hand wringing.

But continue to piss off and insult Vlad Putin and whine about the hacking will be non-stop media fare until the next LeBron James or Kanye “K.S.c” West press conference.

Edward Snowden and Julian Asange were & are right about all this.

The Chinese must be choking on their dim-sum with laughter.

[Argus]

55 minutes ago, Cum Laude said:

The government of the United States of America has spent trillions of military budget dollars expressly for “cyber-warfare”

Citation please.

 

[sharkman]

it seems now that the Dems treated the election like it was a flagged play in football, a freebie.  If they score a touchdown, it's all good.  If they don't, they play up the Russian boogieman and try to get some kind of do-over out of the EC.  

Never mind that the wikileaks proved they threw the nomination process against Bernie, which is election fraud.  There, they don't want a do over.  See how it works?  Play both sides of the street and then get Barry's minions to scream bloody murder about the Russians.  The problem is, it won't fly.  Any intel from the CIA, FBI or anybody else is just going to document that the Russians and Chinese have been hacking about for several years, and the Dems have been fine with it.  

You all better brace yourselves for Monday when the EC certifies the old guy.

[BubberMiley]

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

 

You all better brace yourselves for Monday when the EC certifies the old guy.

I don't dispute the EC will elect him because it is clear Republicans value us-versus-them party politics over country or democracy. They would even try to normalize Russian interference in the election by making up BS that it is just business as usual and has been going on for years.

And now they'll jump when Putin tells them to because they think he's on their team.

[Omni]

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

it seems now that the Dems treated the election like it was a flagged play in football, a freebie.  If they score a touchdown, it's all good.  If they don't, they play up the Russian boogieman and try to get some kind of do-over out of the EC.  

Never mind that the wikileaks proved they threw the nomination process against Bernie, which is election fraud.  There, they don't want a do over.  See how it works?  Play both sides of the street and then get Barry's minions to scream bloody murder about the Russians.  The problem is, it won't fly.  Any intel from the CIA, FBI or anybody else is just going to document that the Russians and Chinese have been hacking about for several years, and the Dems have been fine with it.  

You all better brace yourselves for Monday when the EC certifies the old guy.

There's hacking and then there's "hacking". When it's done to effect the outcome of a democratic election then you need to get off your ass and find out how it was done and plug the hole. And it ain't just the dems who think that. We'll see what happens Monday, but regardless I have a strong doubt this thing is anywhere near over. 

[eyeball]

As Obama said Ronald Reagan would be rolling over in his grave if he could see how widespread the Republican nonchalance to this is.

Of course Reagan would be as unabashedly oblivious as anyone to the spectacle of the US's whinging about their own worthless democracy being interfered with.

[bush_cheney2004]

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

As Obama said Ronald Reagan would be rolling over in his grave if he could see how widespread the Republican nonchalance to this is.

Of course Reagan would be as unabashedly oblivious as anyone to the spectacle of the US's whinging about their own worthless democracy being interfered with.

 

Ronald Reagan made even bigger deals with the Soviets.  

[eyeball]

So what, a deal with America isn't worth the paper it's written on.

[bush_cheney2004]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

So what, a deal with America isn't worth the paper it's written on.

 

So your parroting of Obama means nothing.   American paper is worth more than a queen with expensive hats.

[Cum Laude]

7 hours ago, Argus said:

Citation please.

 

Common knowledge for those of us in the know. Unbelievable for you Canucks who rely on your CBC. Research for your own citation.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Cum Laude said:

Common knowledge for those of us in the know. Unbelievable for you Canucks who rely on your CBC.

Excuse me but trillions of dollars expressly for “cyber-warfare”?  Where did you say you're getting your knowledge again?

Quote

Research for your own citation.

Here's what I found after 0.73 seconds of searching trillions and cyber-warfare;

Quote

 

Worldwide spending on cybersecurity is predicted to top $1 trillion for the five-year period from 2017 to 2021

Source

 

 

You're saying the US has already spent trillions and they couldn't even prevent what appears to be about as sophisticated as an African Princess phishing scam? 

Edited December 18, 2016 by eyeball

[GostHacked]

22 hours ago, Argus said:

Because they're a lot more reliably honest than most of the wack job fruitloop conspiracy sites you DO trust.

You may be right, I should stop reading CBC, CNN, FOX,  ect....

[GostHacked]

18 hours ago, Argus said:

Citation please.

 

It may not be trillions, but every major nation with a large standing army has a cyber-warfare department...  I suggest reading Cyber War by Richard Clarke.