Clinton Urged to Call For Recount After Suspected Vote Tampering And/Or Hacking

[Endus]

The Democrats (and the Republicans (and the Greens, etc)) are a hierarchy, though. The DNC chair, the highest authority the party has, saw fit to attempt to personally elevate one candidate over another, and there's no way that decision occurred in a bubble. What you are correct in saying is that there's no proof, so I will not accuse Clinton of anything on this front.

Right; your argument is that Democrats are a literal hive mind.

I'm pointing out that this is a silly argument.

There's no evidence that Shulz was coordinating some Democrat-wide effort against Bernie. A handful of e-mails that weren't kind to the man, and that's it.

[Xandrigity]

Politics is a cesspool of deplorables at all levels, all sides.

[Nadiru]

Right; your argument is that Democrats are a literal hive mind.

I'm pointing out that this is a silly argument.

There's no evidence that Shulz was coordinating some Democrat-wide effort against Bernie. A handful of e-mails that weren't kind to the man, and that's it.

I'm mostly arguing that of all the candidates Wasserman could've chosen to back, choosing the one with baggage that opens her up to these attacks had poor optics. The fact that Brazile chose to continue this backing in what was supposed to be a covert manner suggests, perhaps not conspiracy, but at minimum incredibly poor judgement.

[Endus]

I'm mostly arguing that of all the candidates Wasserman could've chosen to back, choosing the one with baggage that opens her up to these attacks had poor optics. The fact that Brazile chose to continue this backing in what was supposed to be a covert manner suggests, perhaps not conspiracy, but at minimum incredibly poor judgement.

On the respective parts of Schulz and Brazile, sure.

It's when you start claiming that the entire DNC and Clinton herself were all complicit in some conspiracy that you lose the thread. None of this reflects on Clinton, is the point.

[Forogil]

Every time I read something about this.. they don't ever actually have proof.. just a "hunch." Thats ridiculous.

The recount is checking for proofs - you are basically saying that we shouldn't look for evidence because we don't have evidence.

Compare with athletes winning gold medals - they are tested - even if there is no suspicion of wrong-doing. You are basically saying that we should have higher standards for awarding Olympic gold medals for synchronized swimming than for electing the president of the US.

- - - Updated - - -

Quack quack... there is, neither in the law or in the fact of the matter, a national election. Which is to say, there is no national body politic that, inclusively, makes any political decision as a whole. There are no elections above the state level in the US, period.

The national election refers to the fact that elected body is a national body that makes political decisions for the nation (US congress and president); similarly as a state election elects something that makes political decisions for the state.

You have presented zero/zilch/nothing to back up your claim that national election means something else, and language is used to communicate - if you are using 'national election' in a different meaning than everyone else you are failing that - regardless of whether someone somewhere at some point might have used that definition in some way.

- - - Updated - - -

I believe the monster that is trump was created from two separate issues.

1. People who are tired of the status quo, and the constant gridlock. I think a majority of Americans feel that the political elite don't work for the people, but rather themselves.

2. Backlash against the far left that labels anyone that disagrees with them as evil, and anyone that is white as a oppressor.

One additional possible reason for that backlash is that instead of first arguing what is morally right and after convincing enough people about that then creating laws to support that it has lately been a matter of focusing on the laws (or the interpretation thereof) first.

[Chain Chungus]

Russian Hackers Targeted Nearly Half of States' Voter Registration Systems, Successfully Infiltrated 4

By Mike Levine and Pierre Thomas Sep 29, 2016, 7:02 AM ET


Nearly half of the states in the U.S. have recently had their voter registration systems targeted by foreign hackers, and four of those systems have successfully been breached, sources tell ABC News.

That amount of targeting and actual infiltration into state election-related systems is significantly larger than the U.S. government has been willing to acknowledge.

Hackers working on behalf of the Russian government are suspected in the onslaught against more than 20 state election systems, according to sources with knowledge of the matter.

"There's no doubt that some bad actors have been poking around," FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers Wednesday, without offering any more specifics.

He acknowledged there have been “some attempted intrusions at voter registration databases” since August, when the FBI issued a bulletin to state governments warning that hackers had infiltrated the Illinois State Board of Elections and tried to breach election systems in Arizona.

Top Intel Official Tells Americans to End 'Hyperventilation' Over DNC Hack but Calls Breach Potentially 'Serious'

FBI Chief Responds to Concern Over Cyberthreats to US Election System

Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, Comey said the FBI is trying to figure out "just what mischief is Russia up to in connection with our election."

He emphasized that voter registration databases -— not the voting system itself — are being targeted by hackers.

"This is very different than the vote system in the United States, which is very, very hard for someone to hack into because it's so clunky and dispersed," Comey said, adding that states should be in contact with the Department of Homeland Security and "make sure that their deadbolts are thrown and their locks are on."

During a separate House hearing on Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said 18 states had reached out to his department seeking assistance in protecting their election systems.

Meanwhile, another top Homeland Security official and the head of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission both said a cyberattack could not change the outcome of the 2016 election.

Dr. Andy Ozment, the assistant secretary for cybersecurity and communications at DHS, told lawmakers on Wednesday that the hackers who broke into the voter registration system in Illinois and targeted a similar system in Arizona appear to have been looking to copy the personal information in those databases and perhaps then sell that information online. The aim was apparently not to affect the election process, he said.

"We have not seen intrusions intended to in any way impact individuals' votes and actual voting," Ozment said.

For months, the FBI has been investigating what appear to be coordinated cyberattacks on Democratic organizations -- the most damaging so far being the hack of the Democratic National Committee.

Not only did the hack apparently allow cyberoperatives to steal opposition research on Republican nominee Donald Trump, but many suspect it also led to the theft of internal messages that appeared to show efforts by DNC officials to undermine Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders during the primary season.

After those damaging emails were publicly released by WikiLeaks, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz stepped down as the DNC's chairwoman. Many suspect Russian hackers are also to blame for these cyberassaults on Democratic organizations.

In late June an "unknown actor scanned a state's Board of Election website for vulnerabilities" and, after identifying a security gap, exploited the vulnerability to conduct a "data exfiltration," or unauthorized data transfer, the FBI said in a recent bulletin.

Then in August, hackers used the same vulnerability in an "attempted intrusion activities into another state's Board of Election system," the FBI said.

"The prospect of a hostile government actively seeking to undermine our free and fair elections represents one of the gravest threats to our democracy since the Cold War,” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, , D-Nev., wrote in a recent letter to Comey.

Asked this summer why Russia might be trying to undermine the U.S. political process, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Russian President Vladimir Putin is "paranoid" about the potential for revolutions in Russia, "and of course they see a U.S. conspiracy behind every bush, and ascribe far more impact than we’re actually guilty of."

"They believe we’re trying to influence political developments in Russia, we’re trying to affect change, and so their natural response is to retaliate and do unto us as they think we've done to them," he said.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/russian-hac...ry?id=42435822

Seems like the writing was on the wall at the end of September. So Putin basically put his puppet in power by hacking our election. We no longer have a democracy, we are now Putin's subjects. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin hacked the Brexit vote too: taking the UK and US out of the equation and allowing him a free hand to expand. All while parties on both sides of the pond are busy electing a bunch of Neville Chamberlains.

Donald "Putin's Puppet" Trump must be arrested and tried for high-treason. All government services should be disconnected from the internet and voting needs to return to 100% paper ballots.

[Xandrigity]

Seems like the writing was on the wall at the end of September. So Putin basically put his puppet in power by hacking our election. We no longer have a democracy, we are now Putin's subjects. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin hacked the Brexit vote too: taking the UK and US out of the equation and allowing him a free hand to expand. All while parties on both sides of the pond are busy electing a bunch of Neville Chamberlains.

Donald "Putin's Puppet" Trump must be arrested and tried for high-treason. All government services should be disconnected from the internet and voting needs to return to 100% paper ballots.

Didn't you link the same article from before the election last night? Never gets old eh? Find something new to troll with.

[Barnabas]

From the article:


And if they didn't say it, they would have committed suicide by 3 gunshots to the back of the head.

I'm not for Trump, but he won. Time to accept it and move on for the next 4 years. The keyword of those articles is they "could" have been. Not that they were. Just like the email "could" have contained sensitive info, but they didn't.

Also, seems your link is broken.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politi...lts/index.html

And to add, it seems CNN (AKA Clintons News Network) is the only Major News outlet reporting this currently (Checked USATODAY, MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, NY Times) so I would take it with a grain of salt. CNN lost a lot of reputability over this election.

Are jews People? - CNN

- - - Updated - - -

Seems like the writing was on the wall at the end of September. So Putin basically put his puppet in power by hacking our election. We no longer have a democracy, we are now Putin's subjects. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin hacked the Brexit vote too: taking the UK and US out of the equation and allowing him a free hand to expand. All while parties on both sides of the pond are busy electing a bunch of Neville Chamberlains.

Donald "Putin's Puppet" Trump must be arrested and tried for high-treason. All government services should be disconnected from the internet and voting needs to return to 100% paper ballots.

You make he usa seem like a banana republic. I don;t know if i want to laugh at or feel sorry for you?

[CostinR]

If someone's going to claim the election was hacked by quoting the government, one might ask...I dunno...the government on whether the election results are valid.

The Obama administration is saying there was no hack to change the election results. The Department of Homeland Security is saying the same. It's not like Obama is some Turmp fanboy.

Clinton's own campaign looked at whether or not the results were manipulated and didn't find any evidence.

[Shadowferal]

After a campaign of:

Racism
Sexism
Authoritarianism
Lies
Intimidation
Intolerance
Hatred

and so much more...

And yet she still couldn't do any better...

Think about it. The office of Washington and Jefferson. Of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Truman Eisenhower, , JFK, Lyndon Johnson, Reagan...

Harding, Buchanan, Tyler, Pierce, Hoover, Johnson (Andrew) Grant...shit...these guys were worse than even the worst recently (GWB).

There's no evidence that Shulz was coordinating some Democrat-wide effort against Bernie. A handful of e-mails that weren't kind to the man, and that's it.

You mean to say you're willing to dismiss the fact that Wasserman-Schultz deliberately fucked over Sanders...broke the party's own rules on impartiality, and refused to give Sanders an equal chance... that's okay with you? Wasserman-Schults deliberately undermined the process that should have guaranteed any and all potential candidates equal opportunities for the party nomination.

[May90]

And yet she still couldn't do any better...

This says not as much about her, as about the population, frankly.

[Shadowferal]

This says not as much about her, as about the population, frankly.

It says she was out of touch with the population to say the vey least.
But that's no surprise. It's part of why she lost.

[May90]

It says she was out of touch with the population to say the vey least.
But that's no surprise. It's part of why she lost.

Which, again, says a lot about the population, when a guy like Trump happens to be more in touch with it than her.

And even so, judging by the popular vote, she was a bit more in touch with it.

[Elegiac]

It says she was out of touch with the population to say the vey least.
But that's no surprise. It's part of why she lost.

She was 'out of touch' with a few hundred thousand Rust Belt whites, to be more accurate.

[Endus]

You mean to say you're willing to dismiss the fact that Wasserman-Schultz deliberately fucked over Sanders...broke the party's own rules on impartiality, and refused to give Sanders an equal chance... that's okay with you? Wasserman-Schults deliberately undermined the process that should have guaranteed any and all potential candidates equal opportunities for the party nomination.

That's not what I said. Like, not even remotely. The thing is, I blame Schulz for Schulz's actions and statements. I don't blanket blame all Democrats because they're Democrats, which is what you seem to be upset with me for not doing.

[Shadowferal]

That's not what I said. Like, not even remotely. The thing is, I blame Schulz for Schulz's actions and statements. I don't blanket blame all Democrats because they're Democrats, which is what you seem to be upset with me for not doing.

But with all that she was doing, Clinton was complicit. To infer that she was ignorant of what was going on...not working.

[May90]

But with all that she was doing, Clinton was complicit. To infer that she was ignorant of what was going on...not working.

Her knowing about it doesn't mean she is responsible for it.

[Endus]

But with all that she was doing, Clinton was complicit. To infer that she was ignorant of what was going on...not working.

Yet again, the idea that Democrats are literally a hive mind is a ridiculous notion, and the moment you abandon it, your claim here fails to make any sense whatsoever.

You have no evidence to suggest Clinton was complicit. You're just presuming she was, because you want to slander her for the crime of being a Democrat.

[Deleted]

Will be interesting to see what happens when no real differences will be found, or at least not big enough to change the election outcome.

Trump will hit them so hard with it, it will take years to recover for the Democratic party.

[Deleted]

Will be interesting to see what happens when no real differences will be found, or at least not big enough to change the election outcome.

Trump will hit them so hard with it, it will take years to recover for the Democratic party.

More scared for what would happen if it would actually change the result...

Civil war?


Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk