The intel leak is only a few days old, but the best explanation I've heard yet is Putin reacting to Hillary's divisive statements (while Sec of State) that the Russian elections "were rigged" and heard by people in Russia during the Russian campaign. The conclusion that Putin had a vendetta to disrupt the US elections with Hillary included.

The media has ignored the reality that Moscow's possible hacking of DNC and Podesta's emails were retaliation for Hillary Clinton's assertions that Russian elections in 2011 were "rigged" - an accusation that infuriated Putin. When protests erupted in Russia over the election outcome, Putin blamed Clinton. "She said they were dishonest and unfair," Putin said at the time. He accused then Secretary of State Clinton for giving "a signal" to demonstrators organized "with the support of the U.S. State Department…We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs," Putin said.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016...2/sore-loser-obama-turns-to-russian-hacking-to-delegitimize-trumps-triumph.html

 

Of course the Russian elections were rigged. Put/Medvedev kept putting the opposition in prison to ensure there was only one candidate on the ballet.

 

I get it.....the Russians rigged the elections by uncovering how the DNC was rigging the election by sidetracking Bernie. As usual the democrats think that we are all stupid and need them for guidance and counsel.

 

I trust the Russians more than the DNC

 

In many ways, I'd trust the Russians more than our own corrupt "government". I've noticed how the "populist" media keeps harping about it being a hack, as if that discredits the information. It doesn't. Just because it didn't come from an "approved" source doesn't make it false. It's all about conditioning and controlling the narrative.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

The current "fake news" about Russian interference is nothing more than a seamless continuation of the narrative started by the Clinton campaign.

Hillary pointed to the Russian boogeyman to try to discredit WikiLeaks. The media and the Obama administration are continuing to howl about Russia to try to undermine Trump's election.

It's not just the Clinton campaign - the Russian interference theory is great for the neocons, who keep pushing American policy toward provoking Russia for no benefit to the American public, and are now facing the prospect of a POTUS who is not interested in continuing the endless wars of the Bush and Obama administrations.

Clinton Campaign Calls For Intel Briefing Ahead Of Electoral College Vote

Just as we first laid out on Saturday following Friday night's shock "report" that the CIA had concluded Russia had intervened in the presidential election on behalf of Trump, which we quickly assessed had all the marks of a "soft coup" attempt, and which culminated most recently with a report that up to 10 electors had requested a briefing on "Russian Interference" before the presidential vote, moments ago none other than the Clinton campaign, by way of its top political adviser John Podesta, said the campaign is supporting an effort by members of the Electoral College to request an intelligence briefing on foreign intervention in the presidential election, Politico reported.

In his statement released on Monday, Podesta said "The bipartisan electors' letter raises very grave issues involving our national security," and added that "electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed."

This may be their shot to prevent Trump from taking office without going so far as to assassinate him - which I readily grant is tinfoil hat worthy, but with so many established interests being threatened by a change in the status quo, I can't rule it out.

 

FBI Disputes CIA's "Fuzzy And Ambiguous" Claims That Russia Sought To Influence Presidential Election

 

I do not doubt that the Soviets, er, Russians, are in the mix with our elections. For crying out loud it wasn't that long ago when Ted Kennedy asked them to help the DNC with presidential elections. But where is the evidence?? I am with the FBI on this one...show me evidence. The CIA is notorious for trying to read tea leaves and draw inferences

 

Now Mitch McConnell is on the bandwagon with this malarky.

 

Regardless of who put forth the hacked e-mails... not even the Democrats are denying their authenticity. Our own MSM has been burying facts that put the left in a bad light for decades. It was ripe for picking.

 

Well, it is not like the good ole USA would EVER mess with other nation's elections...

https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/czxff5jxaaav9po-jpg-large.jpeg

 

If anybody thinks that major powers don't interfere in world elections, you're kidding yourself. Russians tried to interfere with ours? No shit... it's what they do and they've been doing it since before the Cold War.

ETA: and yes, as @CardiacColt68 pointed out, we do it as well... so does ISI, MI6, and every other power with a modicum of foreign influence and interests to protect.

 

They may have exposed corruption but the American people were the ones at the polls, as the Green party recount nonsense is affirming daily

 

I was all set to vote for the crony capitalist, corrupt, pathologically lying first female president, but then Putin promised me a hot Russian hooker if I voted for Trump. Still waiting for him to make good on that.

 

Comey's pre-FBI experience was mostly as a government lawyer, and his corruption in favor of Obama during the Clinton email scandal is well known.

He was also one of the Whitewater prosecutors that let the Clintons slide.

 

I don't care who it was. She got exposed for being the crook she is. It was the truth, it isn't like they hacked the voting causing a fraudulent election . People formed opinions on honest information from the hacked emails they wouldn't have gotten from the American media who is in bed with the establishment. If it was the Russians, they did us the American people a service.

Whether it was Americans, Russians, Sweedes, Chinese, Wikileaks's

At this point, what difference does it make?

 

At this point, what difference does it make?

I see what you did there...

And it's pretty sad how in the bag for her the media is. While yes, we should shield our processes from Russian influence (and their interference shouldn't go ignored), we also can't just ignore that the DNC nominated the most corrupt candidate in anything resembling recent memory and did so on a tidal wave of slanted "journalism". It's truly sickening - there are many people (media and DNC staff) who should be ashamed to show their face in public and should have some serious difficulty drawing a paycheck ever again.

 

Oh no you ain't gettin no sweet Belarus babette.
I was thinking more along the lines of a Bulgarian she-man weightlifter from the 1972 Olympics.

 

I think we are all missing the big picture here. O'bam-bam already said that Russia isn't an issue.

"The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War's been over for 20 years."

Not to mention he is already working with Putin, flexibly...

"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

Wait, maybe he helped the ruskies hack our election to get back at the clintons.... whoa... or more likely just to further destroy everything.

 

If only we had a way to make sure someone was who they claimed to be and eligible to vote?

I'm not one to pound the civil war drum. But you take a lot of folks who think their vote is meaningless anyway, then publicly prove it to them via coercion and force, you might just get some blood on your hands. They are too damn greedy and blind to realize they are playing with fire, and standing in gasoline here.

 

AFTER the election is a really p*ss-poor time to suddenly be concerned about this.

This possibility was brought up months BEFORE the election. THAT was the time to be concerned about it.

One has to wonder if there would have been any concern at all if Hillary had won the election.

OK, well...maybe not. Because you know...it was preordained that Hillary was going to win, right?




Here's another question, perhaps to put this into perspective:

What's the difference between this supposed hacking and a candidate taking tens of millions of dollars in "donations" from foreign leaders/powers during an election cycle?

Answer: not a d*mn thing.

 

 

Sometimes it just pays to shoot all the unhappy people .
I'm sorry...wrong thread...or is it?

 

time to get rid of the the agitators. They've proven themselves traitors and treasonous to the republic. Let's start by locking her up. By her I mean the entire Clinton campaign, including Pedo-desta, Caine, Wasserman-Shultz, Brazile, Weiner-Abedin, et al. I'm sure aiding and abetting a person violating national security would be sufficient to get them locked up. Don't forget Comey for dereliction of duty.

start throwing mofo's behind bars and I guarantee the rats will jump the ship of fools.

 

Maybe Trump could shut her up by just giving her a real important job in his administration. Maybe something like...

Ambassador to Russia!!!

C.S.

 

And liberal/Democrat pundits are already beginning to talk about the need for a "do-over" of the election to ensure that everyone's votes are valid.

And if 'they' (whomever 'they' are) decide a do-over vote occurs, in what will be a very one-sided and unilateral decision (and who could make such a decision??), talk about an exit ramp to a shit storm. There very few real reasons I could see a 'civil war'-type scenario, but that's one.

 

At this point, what difference does it make?

I love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This is the scary part of the whole miserable mess - there are way too many idiots working overtime to persuade people that the election was invalid.

The Clinton campaign is running full-steam-ahead to get an "intelligence briefing" to persuade the members of the Electoral College to change their votes. And liberal/Democrat pundits are already beginning to talk about the need for a "do-over" of the election to ensure that everyone's votes are valid.

And none of the unelected bureaucrats on the Electoral College have the security clearance for any kind of meaningful intelligence briefing. And the "10" that they are talking about are 9 D's and one R. Yeah, that's not a problem. Along with just saying, "Fine, vote Hillary." It's 10 votes unless I'm reading the EC process wrong. And I don't think I am.