What do you think is really going on? Let's get a little political here.

I assume you've all heard of the recent Vermont power grid "hacking" story. A few days ago a Vermont utility company found a russian virus on some guy's computer and (part of) the press extrapolated the fact, turning it into a so-called proof of a Russian conspiracy to hack the US power grid... That title was a fucking clickbait, and I just knew it. But not just your average buzzshit clickbait, a serious fucking one this time. When you read the article it became clear: pure bullshit. No evidence whatsoever, all that happened is that they found a regular virus on a random guy's computer, which happens a million times a day everywhere in the world. A few hours later they retracted, a lot of other sites and agencies stated that there was no such thing as a power grid hack attempt. Those media outlets jumped to conclusions to serve their own agenda, it seems.

Now regarding the "hacking" of the US election. Several US government agencies are claiming it's real. Are we being lied to? Are the FBI and homeland security and others all following orders of a higher instance or do they have actual evidence?
So far, they haven't shared much with the general public. Last week they released a document, which I read, but if you read it too you will find that it's absolutely empty of evidence. All it states is "we found some IP addresses in the logs" and "we found a bit of code that was used before". That amounts to nothing at all.

So why do they keep going on about this?
Do you think these agencies have insights they cant share with the public? could they have informants within the russian goverment? that's one of the few things I can think of that they would never be able to reveal. Or maybe it is just more political bullshit... but what's the point? Trump will take office soon and all this Russia crap isn't working. Apparently Trump has something to say on the subject that he will reveal on tuesday or wednesday. I wonder what that may be.

 

[Deleted User]

I believe it. Funny how Russia has more control over how we vote than we do.

 

[Cylent1]

Trump won't be able to take down Soros as great as that would be. Soros is dangerous and a millionaire or a billionaire so if there's a slight chance of anything positive happening, the people have to take action against him and not accept his money.

I wonder who has more money, Trump or Soros?
That doesn't mean diddly squat! Soros will get whats coming to him too...
When Trump says "Clean the Swamp" he's also reffering to the rim and the drain of the swamp!

 

[Taleweaver]

For what it's worth (after 29 pages, I'm glad anyone is still reading), I think this is partially true.

Here's the part that I *don't* believe: that Russia rigged the election by changing votes. It's not that they would be incapable or don't have enough to gain, but all in all, this is pretty risky. After all, rigging an election is an act of war (unless it's the US doing it /sarcasm). In more than a few ways, the US and the UN are already in a second cold war, but they are not in the most strict of senses: the borders aren't drawn. Alliances can still shift and we don't really know who really supports who. The most clear example is Trump being an open Putin supporter. The irony is that this in itself, I would consider to be good news. There's already way too much chaos in the world today without the two largest superpowers being at each others' throats. Should this hacking thing be true, that means that about the only positive thing I can think of on Donald(1) is actually an operation of mutual back scratching.

But I digress...as said, I don't believe they rigged it by changing a couple hundred thousand votes for Hillary into Donald (too risky). But there are more subtle ways to rig things. The leaks are a good one. During the election, I heard people around me saying that USA had to choose between "the plague and the cholera". It wasn't just me disagreeing with that statement, but not understanding how that idea got into people's heads in the first place. On Trump, I couldn't open a newspaper without being slapped with anekdotes on Trump walking the thin line of "this stuff is legal" and stuff that gives free speech a bad name. On Hillary, there was nothing. Or more precise: page filler. So she used an insecure server. Am I supposed to be outraged or something? Christ...I'd be more outraged if she had stolen an apple as a kid. The very fact that the media was digging up this sort of stuff meant that they simply didn't have enough dirt to throw to begin with. Yet somehow, things got represented as if a lifetime in politics was somehow a bad thing when it comes to a job that consists of politics. I'm not a fan of the "free-market"-capitalism(2) either, but voting in someone who got rich by capitalizing on the flaws is just stupid.

I digress again (sorry). What it comes down to is that "hacking" is more than just illegally changing bits on someone else's computer. It's also changing behavior...manipulating things. Either kinds of hacking are hard to spot(3), so it's mostly a matter of what to believe.

The thing that's troubling, though, isn't so much whether someone rigged things or not, but the percentages in which opinions vary. I mean...there were also people denying 9/11, but if those amounted to 2% of the US population, it would be a lot. On topics like this, it's relatively close. On the election, it was even closer (which is all the more troubling considering how different the stances were). I can't but wonder what will come of this. I mean...in 2000 USA voted a dolt over someone who would have taken precautions on global warming. It ended with a war against an innocent country. Now you've got an even larger idiot as president and there are already a lot more people pissed at the US than there used to be. So I'm worried what will happen next time a terrorist attack happens on your soil (and this is more a matter of 'when' than 'if'). It could be war...but it might just as well civil war.




(1): I'm serious, here. The guy despises me in so many ways it was never fun to begin with...but I can't even say "I hate everything about him", because at least he CAN say something positive about someone (even though that someone is someone most Americans consider an enemy, but hey...I'm not a US citizen)
(2): it's between brackets because the current capitalism rules are actually far from really being free. It's just referred to by that name because "winner takes all"-capitalism is harder to sell to people
(3): this whole "why don't they provide evidence?" is somewhat moot. This isn't a case where you can just point out to evidence like weapons of mass destruction (and we all know how well THAT "evidence" turned out to be) or dust for fingerprints. Most hackers got caught because of user error or negligence. If an entire professional team with corporate funding would meddle, the result is more in the lines of stuxnet: incredibly specific, stealthy like a motherfocker, and impossible to trace (it's now six years since then...nobody will ever prove who built that).

 

[Foxi4]

Replace 'Clinton Foundation' with 'Trump Foundation' and you've got the idea. The Clinton Foundation is a public foundation rated as 95% of all proceeds going to charitable efforts by watchdog organizations. The Trump Foundation is a private foundation, thus no rating, and there are multiple reports that Donald uses it as his personal expense account (Melania famously bought a self-portrait of Trump for him with foundation funds). Perhaps equally important is that there is no evidence Trump has ever put any of his own money into his foundation.

Multiple watchdog foundations have put the Clinton Foundation on their watchlist, it's been classified as a slush fund on numerous occasions due to unreasonable overhead costs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/22/a-big-slush-fund-for-the-clinton-foundation/

 

[Xzi]

Multiple watchdog foundations have put the Clinton Foundation on their watchlist, it's been classified as a slush fund on numerous occasions due to unreasonable overhead costs.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/22/a-big-slush-fund-for-the-clinton-foundation/

If they wanted to use it as a slush fund, it would have been as simple as making it a private foundation instead of a public one. The Clintons are plenty wealthy without using other people's money, unlike Trump. It's hard not to be skeptical of negative things about the Clintons, republicans have spent millions of taxpayer dollars starting with their smear campaign against the Clintons in the 90s that still continues to this day.

Here are the actual current ratings for CF: https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680

 

[Foxi4]

If they wanted to use it as a slush fund, it would have been as simple as making it a private foundation instead of a public one. The Clintons are plenty wealthy without using other people's money, unlike Trump. It's hard not to be skeptical of negative things about the Clintons, republicans have spent millions of taxpayer dollars starting with their smear campaign against the Clintons in the 90s that still continues to this day.

Here are the actual current ratings for CF: https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680

Sure, they're extremely wealthy. Is that why Hillary proclaimed that she and Bill were "dead broke" once he left office? Where did the money come from?

 

[Xzi]

Sure, they're extremely wealthy. Is that why Hillary proclaimed that she and Bill were "dead broke" once he left office? Where did the money come from?

Once you've been president, opportunities arise. Businesses/corporations will pay people ludicrous amounts of money to give speeches at meetings, particularly if they think the person giving the speech might have some insights on "being successful." Shit, sometimes you don't even need any prior achievements to make money this way, you only need an audience dumb enough to buy your bullshitting. Just look at Sarah Palin and Tim Tebow.

 

[LinkBlaBla]

America is misleading everyone Russia always Hacks anyways as America and other nation do it too 1 feet away from the Big Red button waiting confirmation of their paranoid thoughts...We living in a Era where peoples take all rumors and what they see on news far too much seriously and fear them....

 

[Xzi]

America is misleading everyone Russia always Hacks anyways as America and other nation do it too 1 feet away from the Big Red button waiting confirmation of their paranoid thoughts...We living in a Era where peoples take all rumors and what they see on news far too much serious and fear them....

Even if Russia wasn't responsible for the hacks it doesn't make things better, given that Trump appointed one of Putin's best buddies as Secretary of State. Nor does it change the fact that Russians have been in and around Trump's businesses for decades. The US will be under heavy Russian influence for the next four years regardless.

 

[LinkBlaBla]

Even if Russia wasn't responsible for the hacks it doesn't make things better, given that Trump appointed one of Putin's best buddies as Secretary of State. The US will be under heavy Russian influence for the next four years regardless.

Don't forget Kim jung Un! America is in a tight situation at the moment.

 

[Foxi4]

Once you've been president, opportunities arise. Businesses/corporations will pay people ludicrous amounts of money to give speeches at meetings, particularly if they think the person giving the speech might have some insights on "being successful." Shit, sometimes you don't even need any prior achievements to make money this way, you only need an audience dumb enough to buy your bullshitting. Just look at Sarah Palin and Tim Tebow.

Sounds to me like once you've been president and your wife is Secretary of State, lots of people will pay you lots of money in "donations" to get shit done by the right people, but you can call it sweet things if you'd like.

Don't forget Kim jung Un! America is in a tight situation at the moment.

Kim Jong Un couldn't hack his way out of a wet paper sack, let's not pretend that North Korea has any clout in the civilised world, even their warheads are mostly fake.

 

[Xzi]

Sounds to me like once you've been president and your wife is Secretary of State, lots of people will pay you lots of money in "donations" to get shit done by the right people, but you can call it sweet things if you'd like.

You mean lobbyists and super PACs and campaign contributions are a thing? No WAI?!?!

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

I believe it. Funny how Russia has more control over how we vote than we do.

You genuinely believe that because..? The mainstream media told you?

 

[SomeKindOfUsername]

Apparently, US intelligence agencies are only right when they're investigating the Clintons (and when it's found out they found nothing during investigation they clearly where bribed/threatened to stop).

It's not too much of a stretch to imagine they interfered with the election. Changing votes is out of the question but influencing the people is entirely plausible. All you need is feed them the "right" information.

This is something you'd hope the people may be interested or worried about. A big issue is the fear of globalization and we've got word of foreigners mucking about with us. You can't really say it's just a dirty liberal MSM trick either since even the republicans are convinced.

Nothing much we can do about it now though. Just time to sit back and watch the fire burn as the years are filled with Trump supporters trying to defend everything he does. I guess this is how republicans felt when Obama was in office, only things will actually be visibly worse and not just theoretically worse.

 

[TheMemeGuy]

Honestly i really meet in the middle with this, like why would Russians associate with Donald Trump, why would they hack the election and why would they do this to the election when their just another country?And how would Donald Trump convince or make them hack the election?How would Russia make it possible for them to hack the Election. But Donald Trump Thinks the election is rigged which make me meet at the middle with this conspiracy of Russia hacking the Election

 

[Lacius]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here's the government document that demonstrates that Russia influenced the US election, how they did it, why they did it, etc.

http://www.msnbc.com/sites/msnbc/files/ica_2017_01.pdf

Edit: Also, here's my girl Rachel doing a great piece on the report if you don't feel like reading it.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/...-calling-out-his-rigged-election-849593411894

 

[RevPokemon]

Not sure if this has been posted, but here's the government document that demonstrates that Russia influenced the US election, how they did it, why they did it, etc.

http://www.msnbc.com/sites/msnbc/files/ica_2017_01.pdf

Edit: Also, here's my girl Rachel doing a great piece on the report if you don't feel like reading it.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/...-calling-out-his-rigged-election-849593411894

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/16980

Regardless I agree that we should take it with a grain of salt and be cautious

 

[Lacius]

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/16980

Regardless I agree that we should take it with a grain of salt and be cautious

I would never argue that a claim should be believed because of who is making it. All claims should be accepted or rejected solely because of the evidence.

 

[RevPokemon]

I would never argue that a claim should be believed because of who is making it. All claims should be accepted or rejected solely because of the evidence.

Nevermeant to imply that you.

But regardless what do I think? Really nothing as US Intel is a pretty complex thing to try to understand.

Although I do think the media is handling the affair horribly as are certain members of Congress (*cough Sen.Graham cough*) especially when considering we also have largely influenced elections for our own desires.

 

[WiiUBricker]

On a side note, if the US wouldn't have a stupid winner-takes-all voting system, there would have been less controversy. I mean, half of the americans voted for Trump, the other half for Hillary. By giving Trump everything and Hillary nothing, basically the system dumped a huge load of crap to half of it's citizen.