Who interfered in 2016 election and how do you know?

1. 63

   dianetrotterposted 4 years ago

   After all of the national intelligence agencies did investigations, they sat before Congress and said Russia did it!  Now we are hearing that Ukraine did it!  What evidence is there to support either.
   
   Is truth no longer truth?  How do you determine what is true?  If we don't know what is true, how can we protect 2020 election?

   replyreport
   1. 63

      dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      From Time Magazine
      https://time.com/5565991/russia-influen … -election/
      
      
      Probing state voter databases
      U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia did not alter actual votes during the 2016 election. But Russians did target voter registration systems or state websites in at least 21 states before Election Day, fully accessed some states’ systems and stole hundreds of thousands of voters’ personal information.
      
      The FBI alerted states to the threat about two months before the 2016 election when hackers accessed voter registration databases in Illinois and Arizona. Then in January 2017, the government issued its first report on election interference and blamed Russia for the hacks. However, DHS did not tell top state officials that their systems were scanned by hackers until nearly a year after the election.
      
      
      Did Russia Affect the 2016 Election? It’s Now Undeniable
      In the wake of the Mueller indictment of a Russian troll farm, any attempt to claim that the 2016 election wasn’t affected by Russian meddling is laughable.
      
      https://www.wired.com/story/did-russia- … ndeniable/

      replyreport
      1. 95

         wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         From your link: "So anyone trying to tell you there was little impact on political views from the tools the Russians used doesn't know. Because none of us knows."
         
         This is a long, long way from "...any attempt to claim that the 2016 election wasn’t affected by Russian meddling is laughable."

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Trump is the first POTUS to ignore the right of oversight of the House of Congress, Dan. He's also the first to ignore all subpoenas issued by the House. A good answer from you would be why he's doing so if he's in the clear. Do tell...

            replyreport
   2. 0

      Stevennix2001posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      The simple answer is that you can't.   That's why there's a lot of misinformation out there and it's always up to the individual to do their own research and make up their own minds on what happened or what's going on now.

      replyreport
      1. 63

         dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         So how do you do your own research.  In the past, if the FBI or other authority said, it happened, they did it and they did it because, we believed them.
         
         Now, there is a split within agencies.  Whom do you believe?  We can't investigate Russia or North Korea ourselves.  Kim is nice now and it's ok for him to set off baby missiles/

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Stevennix2001posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            That's a very good question.    Unfortunately I don't have any answers for you on that one.   All I can tell you is never rely on one source of information.  Always try to look at various points of views and then go from there.    That's all we can do really

            replyreport
   3. 82

      RJ Schwartzposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Let's face it - our elections have been influenced by foreigners for decades - this entire charade playing out in DC is a joke - the hearsay testimony, the constantly changing narrative, and the rush to impeach (all partisan) are POLITICAL tactics.  At the end of the day, everyone, even hard core leftists, know that there is no way the President will be removed from office.

      replyreport
   4. 63

      dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      FBI looking for a Russian https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/cyber/maksim … 861565dbe0
      
      Banking instability
      
      The United States Department of State’s Transnational Organized Crime Rewards Program is offering a
      reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of Maksim Viktorovich
      Yakubets.
      CAUTION
      Maksim Viktorovich Yakubets is wanted for his involvement with computer malware that infected tens of thousands of
      computers in both North America and Europe, resulting in actual financial losses in the tens of millions of dollars.
      Specifically, Yakubets was involved in the installation of malicious software known as Zeus, which was disseminated
      through phishing emails and used to capture victims’ online banking credentials. These credentials were then used
      to steal money from the victims’ bank accounts. On August 22, 2012, an individual was charged in a superseding
      indictment under the moniker “aqua” in the District of Nebraska with conspiracy to participate in racketeering
      activity, conspiracy to commit computer fraud and identity theft, aggravated identity theft, and multiple counts
      of bank fraud. On November 14, 2019, a criminal complaint was issued in the District of Nebraska that ties the
      previously indicted moniker of “aqua” to Yakubets and charges him with conspiracy to commit bank fraud.
      Yakubets is also allegedly the leader of the Bugat/Cridex/Dridex malware conspiracy wherein he oversaw and
      managed the development, maintenance, distribution, and infection of the malware. Yakubets allegedly conspired
      to disseminate the malware through phishing emails, to use the malware to capture online banking credentials,
      and to use these captured credentials to steal money from the victims’ bank accounts. He, subsequently, used the
      malware to install ransomware on victims’ computers. Yakubets was indicted in the Western District of Pennsylvania,
      on November 13, 2019, and was charged with Conspiracy, Conspiracy to Commit Fraud, Wire Fraud, Bank Fraud, and
      Intentional Damage to a Computer.
      If you have any information concerning this person, please contact your local FBI office or the nearest
      American Embassy or Consulate.
      Field Offices: Omaha, Pittsburgh

      replyreport
   5. 63

      dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Is Russia our friend?  Should we develop an international security system with them?  Why should Crimea belong to Russia?

      replyreport
2. 91

   MizBejabbersposted 4 years ago

   Hi, Diane, it's good to see you out and about again in the forums. I think if anyone follows "real" news, he or she will find the truth among the debris. I don't believe there is any doubt that Russia interfered in the 2016 elections. The indictments issued in the Mueller Report is proof enough for me:
   
   https://www.wired.com/story/did-russia- … ndeniable/
   
   But the inference that Ukraine interfered is certainly in doubt until there is some proof. At this point, it is just a smokescreen blown by Trump to take the heat off his own impeachment investigation that is now in the House of Representatives. Nobody has yet to offer any proof, just baseless (so far) allegations. Only a die-hard Trump supporter would believe him.
   
   Trump tried to make it look like the Bidens had done an illegal investigation into corruption in Ukraine, but it was a U.S. government sanctioned investigation.
   
   https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/09/23/th … ps-claims/
   
   So, until and if anyone can come up with proof of any truth in Trump's rantings, Russia interfered, but Ukraine did not.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Agree with all this and will add that Fiona Hill testified under oath that Ukraine election interference is a false narrative generated by Russia to distract from their own genuine interference. So, anyone touting Ukraine interference is doing Putin's bidding.

      replyreport
      1. 95

         Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         How does Fiona Hill know this? Has she conducted an investigation on her own? To take what she says as the absolute truth seems a bit naive.  She provided an opinion and not evidence.

         replyreport
         1. 63

            dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Those who watched the hearings saw her and other credible career employees testify.  You actually make my point.  These are career people who have the expertise and network to know what we don't know.  So unless we are individually convinced, by whatever means, we will not believe people who were hired to do these things.
            
            How do you decide whom you will believe?

            replyreport
            1. 95

               Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I believe someone who makes statements and can back them up with evidence and facts.  Everyone has an opinion.

               replyreport
               1. 63

                  dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  There are reports available for most of what we are told by career government officials:  Russian meddling, Mueller report on obstruction, Ig report disputing Trump's allegations (to be released  12/9) and testimony people are giving on Ukraine.
                  
                  Hard to believe but Rudy is in the Ukraine trying to film a documentary on Ukraine meddling with the corrupt prosecutors.

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     I agree Ukraine did meddle in the election on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
                     
                     "Politico also cited several instances in which Ukrainian officials pushed back against Trump’s comments that Russia’s annexation of Crimea should be accepted as a done deal. For instance, Ukraine’s U.S. ambassador had an op-ed in The Hill that said Trump’s words sent the wrong message. And Ukraine’s minister of internal affairs tweeted that Trump posed "an even bigger danger to the US than terrorism."
                     
                     https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete … kraine-co/
                     
                     It's obvious all the things Ukraine did on behalf of Hillary Clinton didn't help her win the election.

                     replyreport
                  2. 95

                     Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     Okay, I challenge anyone to point to anyplace in the Mueller Report where he claims that obstruction was confirmed.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        When McGahn said Trump told him to lie about Trump telling him to fire Mueller.

                        replyreport
                        1. 63

                           dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           He tried to send Corey Lewandoski to fire Sessions.

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              That too, Diane. Trump doesn't like to do his dirty work himself, unlike the character he played on The Apprentice.

                              replyreport
                              1. 95

                                 Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                 No, it alleges Corey Lewandoski was sent to fire Sessions.  That doesn't make any sense.  The Attorney General serves at the discretion of the president.  President Donald Trump did fire Sessions on November or 2018.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 63

                                    dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                    Lewandoski admitted it.  He told someone else in the AG office to do it.  Yes, it's crazy.  Trump does crazy often.

                                    replyreport
                        2. 95

                           Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           Randy,  again, that is an allegation but it is proof of nothing.
                           
                           If someone alleges that you have a President Donald Trump room in your house filled with pictures of him and MAGA hats and they said you are a devout follower, I wouldn't believe it. It would just be an allegation. 
                           
                           I don't care if the allegation was made by your attorney, next door neighbor or local representative.  So, just because someone say something doesn't make it true.
                           
                           If I went to your house and saw the room, then, I'd think I was in the wrong house, unless you told me it was your room and your house.  That would be direct evidence.
                           
                           See how it works?

                           replyreport
3. 59

   Live to Learnposted 4 years ago

   We spent 25 million (?) + investigating Russian interference. Determining the full extent of their eventual influence has been difficult, at best, and is hotly disputed.
   
   I'd like to know if, and how much, effort was put in by the Ukraine.
   
   However, to me the greater evil was the DNC. How they and Hillary manipulated the system. Not only our government policy in their favor but also their own rank and file by attempting to manipulate to ensure Hillary got the nomination. Did the Obama administration actively use the power of our government to attempt to help Hillary's campaign? How far did the FBI go to help partisan interests?
   
   Russia, at worst, trolled social media. The DNC and Hillary, at worst, stripped our system of any semblance of democracy.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      "I'd like to know if, and how much, effort was put in by the Ukraine."
      
      “Based on questions and statements I’ve heard, some of you on this committee appear to believe that Russia and its security services did not conduct a campaign against our country and that perhaps somehow, for some reason, Ukraine did. This is a fictional narrative that is being perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves. The unfortunate truth is that Russia was the foreign power that systematically attacked our democratic institutions in 2016. This is the public conclusion of our intelligence agencies, confirmed in bipartisan congressional reports. It is beyond dispute, even if some of the underlying details must remain classified.”-- Dr. Fiona Hill, former top Russia adviser on the National Security Council testifying under oath.
      
      Now you know.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Live to Learnposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not a Democrat looking for confirmation bias. I can't just take one person's opinion, nor do I cave to attacks that not taking that opinion means I'm attacking her patriotism.
         
         If you are willing to make a judgement based on one person's stated opinion I can see why the democrats in the House get so much traction with innuendo and rumor.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Apparently you didn't watch the other witnesses during the hearings, instead you parrot Fox News. Not surprised, but others have stated the same thing Hill did. Why would she lie?

            replyreport
         2. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Her statement, made under oath, is based on the knowledge of the entire intelligence community.  Do you think she was lying?  Or, do you think the entire intelligence community is lying? Or, do you have some other inside knowledge that would lead you to question U.S. intelligence professionals and believe Putin could be right?

            replyreport
      2. 95

         Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         "This is the public conclusion of our intelligence agencies, confirmed in bipartisan congressional reports."
         
         I would like her to provide evidence and not just opinion.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            She is accepting the findings of U.S. intelligence agencies. You don't?

            replyreport
            1. 95

               Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I want to see the findings.  I don't trust her interpretation of things.  We still don't know what those findings show. It was U.S. intelligence agencies who used the bogus Steele report to get an unwarranted FISA warrant.  It was U.S. intelligence agencies who have engaged in some pretty shady "surviellence" of the President Donald Trump campaign.
               
               NO I don't trust her opinion of the findings. Until I see them, all we have in a biased opinion.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Once again, I am reminded why it's a waste of time to engage Trump supporters.
                  
                  Every U.S. Intelligence agency has stated their conclusions about election interference. Either you accept them or you believe Putin.
                  
                  Your decision.

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     So, since you know so much about the Russian interference in our election answer these questions.
                     
                     Should be easy for you.
                     
                     1. Exactly HOW did the Russians interfere with the elections.  What actions did the Russians take to interfere? I'll admit they did run some ads on Facebook.  Since that hardly sways an election, what else was done?  An attempt to interfere is not the same as actually interfering.
                     
                     2. If the US Intelligence agencies are so competent, why didn't they take actions during the Obama administration to identify it and stop it?  What happened?  Why did they fail in their job to protect our elections?
                     
                     So, what happened?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        Read the Mueller report. It lays it all out. Of course, you already know that.

                        replyreport
                        1. 95

                           Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           I've read the Mueller report from beginning to end.  I took my time.  As I say, other than a few Facebook ads, did the Russians do anything else? If so, it's not listed in the Mueller Report.

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              How many is a few, Mike?

                              replyreport
                              1. 95

                                 Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                 It's in the Mueller Report.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 61

                                    Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                                    You said you read it, so how many is a few?

                                    replyreport
               2. 61

                  Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  As far as I can tell, the IG report doesn't back up your claims on the Steele Dossier as it hasn't been made public yet. But perhaps you have a double standard as to what you DO believe and what needs to be proven.

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     I bet we can have a better discussion about it after it is released on December 9th.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        But you're already making claims about the Steele Dossier, Mike.

                        replyreport
                        1. 95

                           Readmikenowposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           Randy, even Steele stated he couldn't verify the information he had in his dossier.
                           
                           "There is evidence Steele told the DOJ in July, and the State Department in October, about all of these flaws in his work, and that State officials even detected blatant inaccuracies in his intelligence. If so, all of that information should have been flagged by the FBI as potentially derogatory information weighing against Steele’s use as a source for the FISA warrant."
                           
                           https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house … es-dossier

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              Randy Godwinposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              The Hill sez. I prefer to wait on the IG report instead of reading their article, Mike.

                              replyreport
                  2. 63

                     dianetrotterposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     Also the District Attorney Barr appointed to find out about the government corruption didn't find it.  The IG asked him what he has.

                     replyreport
4. 63

   dianetrotterposted 4 years ago

   My deepest fear is that there is unexplained doubt about our governmental ageencies.  Career officials are losing their jobs, being terrorized and god only knows what else. The IGs testimony is supposedly saying that the Mueller investigation was valid.  Many don't believe it.  There are waay too many politics in our republic.
   
   How do we fix it?  This is frustrating!

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      This is a valid fear.  If our elected officials don't "fix" it by impeaching Trump and removing him from office then we the people MUST. We cannot allow a president to run roughshod over good people while siding with Putin.  It is disgusting and unforgivable.

      replyreport
5. 65

   PhoenixVposted 4 years ago

   A hostile foreign powers goals are, or could be, to delegitimize the presidency itself. The goal, to throw suspicion on whoever became the president; Trump or Hillary by seemingly tilting it in their favor.
   
   The left has been a willing, and/or as usual an unwitting participant in this hypothetical, with their seditious resistance.(they should be rounded up a jailed imho)
   
   Elections have had attempted manipulation since someone thought of the idea of elections a thousand years ago in Greece. The US is probably the worst at regime changes and the like.
   
   Nevertheless, no evidence of any effect on the Electoral College results.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      No, there was no evidence of an effect.  Just an assumption that the deplorables were too stupid to recognize obviously fake news on social media.  Of course, the elites of society have always assumed those beneath them were, well, beneath them and that includes intelligence.

      replyreport
6. 69

   abwilliamsposted 4 years ago

   Mike... priceless!

   replyreport