Rational discussion of Russia's election victory.

Failed Obama Cyber Policies is to blame..

Hillary had her server in a bathroom closet.

now they pretend to care about security..

 so gullible 

the odnis report was absent any new technical evidence, a standard set in previous security reports and analysis. 

from a cyber security and technical perspective it's underwhelming at best, and extremely disappointing.

Countries hack other countries

The United States hacks 

China hacks

Russia hacks

Korea hacks

Iran hacks

Is this a mystery?

Its just the left crybabying because they lost the election..

lost souls  floundering..rudderless..no direction 

Did the federal agencies lie about the Benghazi video lie?

or about ISIS not being a threat?

..do not believe a word from this administration..they LIE.and manipulate information to meet their nefarious agenda 

When President Trump takes office he will perform a real investigation into the problem and set forth real solutions to cure the cyber security problem that obama has neglected over the last eight years.

Clapper also testified that there is no evidence the Russian hacking changed vote tallies "or anything of that sort." He did say, however, there is no way of gauging Russia's actions "on choices the electorate made."

Dead2 doesn't care about Russian hacking because he doesn't care about American democracy.

His only concern is a white ethnostate.Whatever steps get America closer to that is A-Ok with him.

It's not a cyber problem, it's a Russia problem. 

Incompetent boobs..

now they cry

the blame rests on them

Sources: US officials warned DNC of hack months before the party acted

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/democratic-convention-dnc-emails-...

DNC turmoil confirms warnings: Hackers are targeting campaigns

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-turmoil-confirms-warnings-hack...

DNC IGNORED repeated warnings from the FBI about cyber-attacks!!

While Democrats are still running around like chickens with their heads cut off about the election, the FBI is saying that they repeatedly warned the DNC about their getting hacked, and they ignored them.

http://therightscoop.com/dnc-ignored-repeated-warnings-fbi-cyber-attacks/

It's not a cyber problem, it's a Russia problem. >>

China hacked the FDIC - and US officials covered it up, report says

http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/13/technology/china-fdic-hack/

China repeatedly hacked US, stole data on nukes, FBI & war plans – security report

https://www.rt.com/usa/364614-us-china-cyberattack-targets/

Hacking of Government Computers Exposed 21.5 Million People

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/us/office-of-personnel-management-hack...

Its a competence problem

Cyber espionage is real problem in todays world and has been for many years

this isn't in question, the problem lies in the inadequate security measures set forth by the incompetent clown administration

obama and the boobs failed once again.

Weird Steve,

Unfortunately, once Dead2 enters the fray, there is no rational discussion. It leaps to "whataboutism".

For clarification purposes, I am NOT a DNC, Hillary or even Bernie fanatic. I'm an independent voter who is disenchanted with the 2 party system and wished a bona fide, non-lunatic fringe, truly successful, ethically and moral candidate like Michael Bloomberg ran.

It is a rare day when ALL of our nations disparate intelligence agencies join together on a subject. In this case, it even includes James Comey who made some questionable moves during the election cycle and certainly would not "fall in" under any "current administration" edicts that Dead2 needs to believe is part of this mess.

The hue and cry over Hillary's emails was all about the potential for security breaches and her recklessness in it. It pre-supposes that other nations would be after that data which is of course natural. It has been proven, even by the aforementioned Mr. Comey, that there was no such hack.

Jump ahead to the topic of Russian and wiki hacks, trolling and influencing.

NO ONE is saying that they messed with voting machines, etc. This is about specifically hacking, trolling and steps associated with influencing the election. I would submit right here that this IS a big topic no matter which way any such influencing went. Translation, if they found that the efforts were to support Hillary and she lost (as she did), it would STILL be a big deal! This gets lost with Trump and his disciples. It does NOT even include any of the topics that surround whether or not Trump has debt or business ties, etc. 

Our collective agencies have come to determine that there was a concentrated effort to fuck with our election process. No matter who won, it should concern all.

I am heartened that there are indeed members of the GOP who understand that Putin is not a trustworthy man and the overall gravity of the situation.

I wonder where the rest of the outrage is. Where is Jason Chaffetz who spent millions of our dollars and huge amounts of time that might have been spent on more productive things investigating Hillary's emails because they "could've been hacked" when he has right in front of him, proof of actual fucking hacking?

To move the "whataboutism".....blame the outgoing admin game is as old as the hills. The concern we should all have is that even though Dead2 thinks when Trump steps in, he will fix things, how can a reasonable person rest easy on that thought knowing that the buffoon is in full denial mode principally because of his precious ego (and possibly deeper issues) and has publically stated "we need to move on"?

Dead2's comment above of "its a competence problem" is actually spot on. However, there is reasonable comfort in knowing the incoming guy wants to go back to freaking courier pigeons, thereby, officially calling any notion of competence a pipe dream.

blame the outgoing admin game is as old as the hills. >>

Liberal group blames Bush for raising deficits, credits Obama for lowering them

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/27/occupy-democ...

Blue State Blues: Only One More Year to Blame George W. Bush

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/01/blue-state-blues-one-...

After Paris Attacks, Democratic Candidates Blame Bush for ISIS

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/11/14/after-paris-attacks-democ...

Albright: Blame Bush 'forever'

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/08/albright-dems-blame-bush-forever-0...

 Obama and Top Dems Blame Bush For Gas Prices

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQb_4hXLx2Q

For Some Democrats, Bush Is To Blame-Forever And Ever

http://townhall.com/columnists/byronyork/2012/05/22/for_some_democrats_b...

Thank you so much for completely proving my point. "Whataboutism" only game in town when reasonable thought is verboten

No one to blame but themselves.

Agree to A,B,C and for D.

For me, this is not about de-legitimizing the Trump victory for a host of reasons, but the biggest being, he has and will continue to do that very well on his own accord. All this moron has to do is STFU and he can sail for 4 years, but he's too bat shit crazy to do it. That point is unassailable. NO ONE is making him continue to tweet, continue to promise stupid shit and then not deliver ("I know stuff about hacks and will tell you bigly next Tuesday"). The shit and list goes on and on, again, ALL by HIS own doing. 

I find some comfort in knowing that there are people in authority who do realize the gravity of the cyber situation even if it might be self serving (GOP who came out and said hey this time it was them, but next time it could be us). John McCain, who, but for his own incredibly stupid pick of what's her name as VP, might've had a chance to win 4 years ago, will be around for a bunch more years and he will continue to pound that this is indeed a big deal.

Reagan, who is held up in the highest esteem by the GOP folk, cautioned that with Russia, we had to "trust, but verify". At that time, he was working with Gorbachov who has been the most reasonable Russian in scores of years. Putin is no Gorbachov. Trump is right, it would be nice if we had easier relations with Russia. You know who has said that as well? Everyfuckingbody from Clinton (Bill), Bush, GW and even Obama. They all did out of the gate of their presidencies and each found out, that Putin was not a nice guy. So, here comes dumb ass Trump thinking he's the first to believe Russia can be good like it's a revelation. Assuming that there is NO other formal and really scary other shit like debt, etc. between Russia and Donny, Trump is the most gullible dangle we've ever seen. How will he react when Putin marches on Georgia or some other former Soviet state? A 140 word tweet ain't gonna help him then and there will be a bunch of people screwed in the process. Me, I'm praying that this Mattis guy might prove to be a saving grace amongst the mayhem. 

Democrats are desperately clinging to  their deplorable basket of sore-loserism.

And as for the leaked emails being a sufficient disruption to change public opinion so substantially that Hillary lost the election because of it, I say “BWA HA HA HA HA HA.” The notion that those heavily editorialized (in her favor) tidbits of information being periodically mentioned on some of the news networks somehow altered the eventual outcome of the election, in the face of the wall-to-wall “Donald Trump is the unholy offspring of Hitler and Beelzebub” media blitzkrieg against him, is utterly laughable.

You have to be nuts if you think that the comparatively small amount of negative coverage Hillary was given was anything more than a drop of water in the raging sea of anti-Trump coverage. The idea that such a drop would have more impact than the sea is preposterous.

http://www..com/absentee/2016/12/12trump-cia-fbi-russia-dnc-rnc/

one key point, virtually all of the anti-Trump coverage was written, conceived and performed by Trump's own publicly available actions

the amazement of reasonable people (not just Dems) from around the world is that 62M people chose to look the other way. friends from across the pond at least take solace in knowing that the majority of voters (65M) had a sense of ethics and morality. to be sure, it means nothing from a who's about to take over running the country, but the sense that there's at least a plurality of sanity gives hope.

^I agree with you wholeheartedly, Markd.

To believe that Russia has hacked the DNC; to believe that Hilary Clinton should be locked up, to believe that there's a child sex-ring at a DC pizza place;  to believe that Comey purposely screwed the election up; to believe whatever somebody else told you is exactly that: a BELIEF.

You may or may not have faith in that claim, based on the source of the information and who is sharing the info.

Just like Science and Religion.

However, witnessing the observable actions/behaviors directly from the source is about as close as you can get to the truth, IMHO.

One does not have to be an elitist to follow such common sense, nor does one have to be an idiot to believe.

I dont think its unreasonable to believe Russia's campaign had a drastic influence on the outcome of the election. Some of these states, Chump won by less than a percentage. Are you really going to tell me that 1% of the electorate of these states couldnt be persuaded by the Russian's misinformation campaign? Furthermore, how many people actually stayed home or voted a 3rd party because of it? Its impossible to quantify, but still reasonable to think a number as small as 1% could have been affected. 

Great point nuclear ned. At the end of the day, from a count of all voters, almost 3M more voted for the Dem vs. the Rep (2.1%). In the all important EC, I believe that the total number of votes in swing states that made the difference was approximately 100k. Essentially, that's less than the number of people who attend a single Univ. of Michigan home football game which is 0.07% of the total electorate who voted. We are all swayed by things so yes, very reasonable to think that a major campaign to influence people would indeed influence some.

As noted earlier, it's now about moving away from who won, who lost and why and reasonably look at what happened and deal with it. Clearly, there are some who can't (Trump, Dead Squared, etc.).

Article below and via link today from Reuters which is shown to be non-partisan. Interesting points highlighted. Believe it highlights that there is non-partisan concern at the highest levels about this vs. this just being a Hillary/Dem thing that some are not able to acknowledge.     http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-cyber-idUSKBN14S0O6

WORLD NEWS | Mon Jan 9, 2017 | 7:19am EST

Trump acknowledges Russia role in U.S. election hacking: aide

By Toni Clarke and Dustin Volz | WASHINGTON

President-elect Donald Trump accepts the U.S. intelligence community's conclusion that Russia engaged in cyber attacks during the U.S. presidential election and may take action in response, his incoming chief of staff said on Sunday.

Reince Priebus said Trump believed Russia was behind the intrusions into the Democratic Party organizations, although Priebus did not clarify whether the president-elect agreed that the hacks were directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"He accepts the fact that this particular case was entities in Russia, so that's not the issue," Priebus said on "Fox News Sunday."

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.

Trump had rebuffed allegations that Russia was behind the hacks or was trying to help him win, saying the intrusions could have been carried out by China or a 400-pound hacker on his bed.

With less than two weeks until his Jan. 20 inauguration, Trump has come under increasing pressure from fellow Republicans to accept intelligence community findings on Russian hacking and other attempts by Moscow to influence the Nov. 8 election. A crucial test of Republican support for Trump comes this week with the first confirmation hearings for his Cabinet picks.

A U.S. intelligence report last week said Putin directed a sophisticated influence campaign including cyber attacks to denigrate Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and support Trump.

The report, commissioned by Democratic President Barack Obama in December, concluded vote tallies were not affected by Russian interference, but did not assess whether it influenced the outcome of the vote in other ways.

'ACTION MAY BE TAKEN'

After receiving a briefing on Friday from leaders of the U.S. intelligence agencies, Trump did not refer specifically to Russia's role in the presidential campaign.

In a statement, he acknowledged that "Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat(ic) National Committee."

Trump spokesman Sean Spicer told Reuters the president-elect's conclusions remained the same and that Priebus' comments were in line with Friday's statement.

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, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss domestic political positions.

The expert added that Putin's "multifaceted campaign of cyber attacks and espionage, propaganda, financial leverage, fake news and traditional espionage" had expanded in the United States since the election, "and it will be a shock if it does not escalate in France, Germany and elsewhere this year."

Priebus, the former Republican National Committee chairman Trump tapped as White House chief of staff, said Trump planned to order the intelligence community to make recommendations as to what should be done. "Action may be taken," he said, adding there was nothing wrong with trying to have a good relationship with Russia and other countries.

Two senior Republican senators urged Trump to punish Russia in response to U.S. intelligence agencies' conclusion that Putin personally directed efforts aimed at influencing the election.

Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain said evidence was conclusive that Putin sought to influence the election - a point that Trump has refuted.

"In a couple weeks, Donald Trump will be the defender of the free world and democracy," Graham said. "You should let everybody know in America, Republicans and Democrats, that you're going to make Russia pay a price for trying to interfere."

On Saturday, Trump wrote on Twitter that having a better relationship with Russia was a "good thing."

U.S. Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said three U.S. presidents had tried and failed to be friends with Putin.

"I’m just not sure it’s possible," Nunes said on the "Fox News Sunday" program. "I’ve cautioned his administration to be careful with Putin, as he remains a bad actor."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell agreed it was not unusual for a new president to want to get along with the Russians. He added on CBS, however, that the Russians remained a "big adversary, and they demonstrated it by trying to mess around in our election."

Obama, who himself tried to "reset" relations with Russia after he took office in 2009, told NBC he did not think he had underestimated the Russian president.

"But I think that I underestimated the degree to which, in this new information age, it is possible for misinformation for cyber hacking and so forth to have an impact on our open societies, our open systems, to insinuate themselves into our democratic practices in ways that I think are accelerating," he said in an interview with "Meet the Press" broadcast on Sunday.

Im sure its easy to find.. but Im fairly confident many fake news stories outperformed actual stories on facebook in the 3 months prior to the election. I think Buzzfeed and Vox had articles on this very idea. I would be interested to see fake news stories shared by people in swing states. It would be interesting to see if these stories were circulated more in the midwest or Florda. 

Of all the hacked emails which single email do you consider most damaging to the election of Hillary Clinton?