Obama to order full investigation on Russia hacking

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm sure that our intelligence has a very good idea of what happened and what can be done to improve security in the future. If we can say unequivocally that the Russians did it, then we most likely know how they did it. Not objecting to an investigation but it seems to me that most of the real leg work has already been done.

I agree with you here, just pointing out possible things to learn. I'm sure there are more, I'm just not an investigation expert.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Apparently neither of your Great Minds bothered to read the article. lol.

It's an idiom...just saying.

The point is to review not only the elections but other activity going back 8 years and see what lessons they can disseminate to help prevent it in the future.

To me, a review does not mean the same thing as an investigation.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

And while they're at it, I think they should launch a full investigation of the 95% Hillary voting Detroit electoral districts where some 600+ offices couldn't be recounted because the ballot boxes had as much as 30x the number of votes recorded as were physically in the ballot boxes during the MI recount.

And the Democrat judge who had the recount halted.

Link?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I think Clinton said it best when she was facing inquiry over the fake news she reported about the Benghazi incident:

"Fake news?!" How did all this Myth arise?

I was watching when it unfolded. They were clueless -- more or less -- about the identity or cause of the attack. The casualties were miniscule compared to Bush's war, the 1983 bombing that killed 250 Marines during Reagan's first term, and other comparisons are legion.

They could point to the video as part of "multiple causality." The GOP was eager on steroids to exploit it as an election-year issue.

In some other thread, I'd cited an op-ed by Greta van Susteren, who baldly lied that the congressional investigation "proved" that Al Qaeda perpetrated the attack. She was counting on the public's short memory: It was six months or more before the identity of the attackers was known, and it was an FBI investigation. Period. That simple.

The GOP WANTED the public to believe that it "made a difference" because they refused to admit Bush's mistake with the war in Iraq. They were looking for any little excuse, any splinter they could turn into a 2x4. And the frenzy about it concerned semantics: "Whether you call it Radical Islamic Extremism" or simply "Terrorism."

I'm thinking to post a warning at my front gate: "If you identify yourself forthrightly as Republican, or if you're here to 'campaign' for a Republican cause -- then you've done it to yourself: You have 10 SECONDS to RUN after you hear me rack the shotgun."

That's what I think of the GOP. They want us to focus on an imagined existential threat half a world away. People should really focus on the "Enemy Among Us," because "it's here." No need to send troops to the Middle East. And the Enemy that is HERE wants to tell you that we're under dire threat of being blown up in Boise, because that "other Enemy" is only "likely" here or coming across the border.

 

[Starbuck1975]

no they dont. Just like you wont see them in this thread. Reality distortion fields must be maintained at max.

Speaking for myself, I want there to be an investigation. Cyber warfare is no insignificant threat, particularly if directed at tampering elections.

However, I don't know how you stop propoganda and false news. Propoganda is almost as old as warfare itself.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Speaking for myself, I want there to be an investigation. Cyber warfare is no insignificant threat, particularly if directed at tampering elections.

However, I don't know how you stop propoganda and false news. Propoganda is almost as old as warfare itself.

True. And you could say that Achilles and his team at Troy were simply ancient covert-operators.

But it's one thing when you're talking about Gutenburg's printing press; another thing when you're coming up in the age of radio and then TV; and something beyond that with pick-your-poison cable plurality and now "everything on the Internet is real!"

So you start with Goebbels and Laswell, follow the trail through Bedell Smith and CIA, the "domination paradigm" and how it leaked out into the advertising sector. Now we have students of all of it creating "Breitbart."

You can't stop free speech, but the proliferation of the Lie is a real risk.

One could be pessimistic that Trump will terminate any further explanation about Russian involvement. At least, the established agencies of the national security apparatus have identified the sources or the directions from which their hacking and misinformation came.

On probabilistic terms, though, one can tentatively conclude that we have a Russian mole in the White House, with the irony that it is plutocratic and not communistic.

 

[Commodus]

Investigations are good things, including for Benghazi -- even if you don't turn up anything, it's better to have some answers than to leave a mystery.

The problem with Benghazi, as you might guess, is that there have been multiple investigations that have been fruitless. It emphasizes that this is more about scoring political points than learning the truth.

That's not to say that there isn't political motivation to investigate hacking around the election (show that Russia skewed the election and Trump's hopes come crashing down), but this is one of those cases where the consequences of not investigating could be serious. You don't want the Russians, or Chinese, or other state actors to get the impression that they can manipulate US elections with impunity.

 

[Phynaz]

It wont change the election. But we should know if the deplorables were charged up by a communist oligarchy.

Awesome example of liberal tolerance.

BTW, "deplorables" isn't a word.

 

[Victorian Gray]

No, it was not a foreign actor. Seth Rich was likely one of the leaks, which is why he had to die.

Did you check out the pizza place yet?

 

[AnonymouseUser]

"Fake news?!" How did all this Myth arise?

I was watching when it unfolded. They were clueless -- more or less -- about the identity or cause of the attack.

The attack was first reported as a knee-jerk reaction to an anti-moslem YouTube video which, as we all know, was a bold-faced lie. The staffers at the embassy had requested additional security in the days/weeks leading up to the attacks, but to their dismay actually had security reduced, and no attempt was made to rescue them after the attacks began.

The GOP WANTED the public to believe that it "made a difference" because they refused to admit Bush's mistake with the war in Iraq. They were looking for any little excuse, any splinter they could turn into a 2x4. And the frenzy about it concerned semantics: "Whether you call it Radical Islamic Extremism" or simply "Terrorism."

I'm thinking to post a warning at my front gate: "If you identify yourself forthrightly as Republican, or if you're here to 'campaign' for a Republican cause -- then you've done it to yourself: You have 10 SECONDS to RUN after you hear me rack the shotgun."

Yes, there are plenty of Republicans that are no different than Democrats, and seek the same goals. That's why I voted for Trump and then Libertarians when possible. Fuck (R) and (D), but especially anyone named Bush or Clinton.

 

[Jaskalas]

I have no reason to believe the underlying story, but I fully endorse an investigation and the publicity of any evidence discovered.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The attack was first reported as a knee-jerk reaction to an anti-moslem YouTube video which, as we all know, was a bold-faced lie. The staffers at the embassy had requested additional security in the days/weeks leading up to the attacks, but to their dismay actually had security reduced, and no attempt was made to rescue them after the attacks began.



Yes, there are plenty of Republicans that are no different than Democrats, and seek the same goals. That's why I voted for Trump and then Libertarians when possible. Fuck (R) and (D), but especially anyone named Bush or Clinton.

Yup, the Embassy was in a tough neighborhood being guarded by locals per a request the Ambassador made. The State Department asked for funds to harden this and other Embassies but Congress refused to fund it. This is the scandal that was never addressed.

 

[shady28]

Link?

Half of Detroit votes may be ineligible for recount\

But I especially like this guys theory. It's very, Trump-like :

http://ibankcoin.com/zeropointnow/2...aud-uncovered-in-detroit-before-judge-halted/

"So the Michigan recount was stopped yesterday by the same judge who authorized it – just one day after some really interesting reports began to surface about massive errors and discrepancies in the counts.

Wait a minute… Was Jill Stein’s recount all about exposing democrats cheating? Could this whole charade have been about multiple whistleblower reports of shady ballot handling which made it to Trump, who shared it with Stein, who then trolled everyonewith multiple state recounts?

Of course not, that would be madness.

...

Also observed during the Detroit recount by monitors Ken and Penny Crider, was a sealed ballot box labeled as containing 306 Ballots, yet which only contained 50ballots upon cracking it open. Unfortunately where such discrepancies occur, the original count stands. The Criders also observed an election official at another precinct whose ballot count matched the boxes breathing a sigh of relief that they “have a countable precinct.”"
​

 

[jman19]

Would be great to get an honest, thorough, and hopefully non-partisan review of whether there was an foreign involvement, and to what extent. For everyone saying "what does it matter now?", I think the people have a right to know the truth one way or the other.

Does everything have to turn in to a left vs. right shit-fit?

 

[cubby1223]

I've said it many times -- unless you can show that the leaked information was false or made up, the source of the information really doesn't change anything. Is it true or not. Sure, it's good to know who's doing what etc, but it doesn't fundamentally change anything.

I have zero problem with an investigation, but I don't think it can result in much of anything regardless.

If the Democrats and other liberals & progressives hadn't insulted anyone who wasn't in lock-step with Clinton as a deplorable racist, then perhaps outside influence wouldn't have such an impact. Hillary would have the opportunity to defend herself and have everyone listening. But as it stood, the Democratic tactic was to insult and shut out the opposition. That doesn't make people want to seek out your further opinions and comments.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Then what's the point of an investigation? Hey, we already know the ruskies did it. Now what?

Then exactly what do we need to investigate if we already know the core facts of the matter?

So you don't think it would be of value to know more beyond who was likely responsible? Maybe investigate any vulnerabilities that were exploited? The scope and depth of any breaches? None of that is of importance beyond we know it was the Russians?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

So you don't think it would be of value to know more beyond who was likely responsible? Maybe investigate any vulnerabilities that were exploited? The scope and depth of any breaches? None of that is of importance beyond we know it was the Russians?

Doc clarified his point a few posts ago.

 

[jackstar7]

Awesome example of liberal tolerance.

You should participate: https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/liberal-tolerance.2491747/

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Doc clarified his point a few posts ago.

Ahh dammit. I'm a pedantic ass then.

 

[Starbuck1975]

True. And you could say that Achilles and his team at Troy were simply ancient covert-operators.

But it's one thing when you're talking about Gutenburg's printing press; another thing when you're coming up in the age of radio and then TV; and something beyond that with pick-your-poison cable plurality and now "everything on the Internet is real!"

So you start with Goebbels and Laswell, follow the trail through Bedell Smith and CIA, the "domination paradigm" and how it leaked out into the advertising sector. Now we have students of all of it creating "Breitbart."

You can't stop free speech, but the proliferation of the Lie is a real risk.

One could be pessimistic that Trump will terminate any further explanation about Russian involvement. At least, the established agencies of the national security apparatus have identified the sources or the directions from which their hacking and misinformation came.

On probabilistic terms, though, one can tentatively conclude that we have a Russian mole in the White House, with the irony that it is plutocratic and not communistic.

The internet perhaps increases the volume of propoganda, but I think there are still limitations to the reach and extent of its effectiveness.

Similarly, that we were facing the potential of another Clinton or another Bush in the White House was as much indicative of a plutocracy as Trump.

The Russian mole thing I am somewhat skeptical of. The Wikileaks email dumps certainly weakened Clinton, and while I think Trump exploited and benefitted from them, the accusations of collusion are quite serious.

 

[dank69]

Half of Detroit votes may be ineligible for recount\

But I especially like this guys theory. It's very, Trump-like :

http://ibankcoin.com/zeropointnow/2...aud-uncovered-in-detroit-before-judge-halted/

"So the Michigan recount was stopped yesterday by the same judge who authorized it – just one day after some really interesting reports began to surface about massive errors and discrepancies in the counts.

Wait a minute… Was Jill Stein’s recount all about exposing democrats cheating? Could this whole charade have been about multiple whistleblower reports of shady ballot handling which made it to Trump, who shared it with Stein, who then trolled everyonewith multiple state recounts?

Of course not, that would be madness.

...

Also observed during the Detroit recount by monitors Ken and Penny Crider, was a sealed ballot box labeled as containing 306 Ballots, yet which only contained 50ballots upon cracking it open. Unfortunately where such discrepancies occur, the original count stands. The Criders also observed an election official at another precinct whose ballot count matched the boxes breathing a sigh of relief that they “have a countable precinct.”"
​

If you actually follow the link to the original source you find:

In Detroit, 158 of the 392 precincts with ballot discrepancies had just one extra ballot accounted for either in the poll book or in the ballot box, according to the Wayne County’s canvassing report.

For suburban Wayne County, 72 percent of the 218 precincts boxes with discrepancies in the number of ballots were off by one ballot.

The other ballot discrepancies in Detroit and Wayne County precincts ranged between two and five ballots, according to the report.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

If you actually follow the link to the original source you find:

HaHa I knew it

 

[thraashman]

The attack was first reported as a knee-jerk reaction to an anti-moslem YouTube video which, as we all know, was a bold-faced lie.

FIRST, the phrase is BALD-faced, not bold-faced. It originally was bare faced lie.
Second, the guy who masterminded the attack said to others during the attack it was in retaliation for the video
Third, the bipartisan report from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence issued 2 years after the attacks says there's intelligence that suggests the video was related.

Some intelligence suggests the attacks were likely put together in short order, following that day's violent protests in Cairo against an inflammatory video, suggesting that these and other terrorist groups could conduct similar attacks with little advance warning.

Fourth, the attackers, recognized as members of a local militant group called Ansar al-Shariah, did tell bystanders that they were attacking the compound because they were angry about the video

 

[nakedfrog]

If the Democrats and other liberals & progressives hadn't insulted anyone who wasn't in lock-step with Clinton as a deplorable racist, then perhaps outside influence wouldn't have such an impact.

They didn't.

Hillary would have the opportunity to defend herself and have everyone listening.

Yes, let's pretend you would have listened, shall we?

But as it stood, the Democratic tactic was to insult and shut out the opposition. That doesn't make people want to seek out your further opinions and comments.

Yes, solely a democrat tactic.

 

[fskimospy]

If the Democrats and other liberals & progressives hadn't insulted anyone who wasn't in lock-step with Clinton as a deplorable racist, then perhaps outside influence wouldn't have such an impact. Hillary would have the opportunity to defend herself and have everyone listening. But as it stood, the Democratic tactic was to insult and shut out the opposition. That doesn't make people want to seek out your further opinions and comments.

Yes, I'm sure the issue that made someone lose to Donald Trump was that people are turned off by those who insult people that disagree with them.

The best part is that I think you're serious. Lol.