Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Proving the Russian hack without revealing too much is a challenge; Why us mere mortals may not and probably should not see the evidence
Topic Started: Jan 1 2017, 08:26 PM (1,290 Views)
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

ringotuna
Jan 5 2017, 12:58 AM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 09:40 PM
jake58
Jan 4 2017, 07:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 05:27 PM
ringotuna
Jan 4 2017, 03:43 PM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I'm not claiming that Trump did not win. Under our system he did.

But the statement that American's supported him is not necessarily true since more people voted for his opponent.
If you exclude California - 75% voter participation(?), rest of country 55%... Trump wins popular vote by over a million. I vote to exclude California as I don't want those tosspots picking our President ad nauseum.

So we will selectively disallow votes because they will turn the numbers away from our desired outcome. Hmmm, which Red state do I want to throw out.
Well ya tried Pennsylvania, Michigan, & Wisconsin.....

How'd that work out for ya?


:rotflmao:
Meanwhile our intelligent intelligence agencies need at least a couple extra days to prepare a briefing to Trump on the Russian hacking of the DNC....Trump IS SMARTER than most of them so their tale needs fine tuning....It is apparent that in the last 8 years these agencies have been indoctrinated by Democrats....You can see it in the way they swing............... :booboo:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
This isn't complicated stuff...


Posted Image
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

Robert Stout
Jan 5 2017, 01:32 AM
ringotuna
Jan 5 2017, 12:58 AM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 09:40 PM
jake58
Jan 4 2017, 07:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 05:27 PM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
If you exclude California - 75% voter participation(?), rest of country 55%... Trump wins popular vote by over a million. I vote to exclude California as I don't want those tosspots picking our President ad nauseum.

So we will selectively disallow votes because they will turn the numbers away from our desired outcome. Hmmm, which Red state do I want to throw out.
Well ya tried Pennsylvania, Michigan, & Wisconsin.....

How'd that work out for ya?


:rotflmao:
Meanwhile our intelligent intelligence agencies need at least a couple extra days to prepare a briefing to Trump on the Russian hacking of the DNC....Trump IS SMARTER than most of them so their tale needs fine tuning....It is apparent that in the last 8 years these agencies have been indoctrinated by Democrats....You can see it in the way they swing............... :booboo:
Another freak'n lie from our President-elect and you picked it up and are now lying to cover your ass. The briefing is tomorrow and was always tomorrow.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
The "Russian Hacking" Story Changes Again

More importantly, however, the hearing comes hours after Reuters reported overnight that U.S. intelligence agencies obtained what they considered to be conclusive evidence after the November election that Russia provided hacked material from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks. However, in the latest change of the narrative, this time the allegation is that Russia provided the hacked data through a third party, three U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

Wikieaks was quick to highlight that according to the report, US officials admitted that the Wikileaks "source" was not Russia, and that the goal posts now shifted to the source's source:

n keeping with the theme of providing no proof to the general public, the officials declined to describe the intelligence obtained about the involvement of a third-party in passing on leaked material to WikiLeaks, saying they did not want to reveal how the U.S. government had obtained the information. So just trust them, please.

The shift in the narrative is curious because as a reminder, officials had concluded "months earlier" that Russian intelligence agencies had directed the hacking, but had been less certain that they could prove Russia also had controlled the release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. It now appears that along with lack of evidence, the attention has shifted to an "intermediary" as being the responsible party .

LINK
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jake58

BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 09:40 PM
jake58
Jan 4 2017, 07:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 05:27 PM
ringotuna
Jan 4 2017, 03:43 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 01:58 PM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
It's the American electoral system.
I'm not claiming that Trump did not win. Under our system he did.

But the statement that American's supported him is not necessarily true since more people voted for his opponent.
If you exclude California - 75% voter participation(?), rest of country 55%... Trump wins popular vote by over a million. I vote to exclude California as I don't want those tosspots picking our President ad nauseum.

So we will selectively disallow votes because they will turn the numbers away from our desired outcome. Hmmm, which Red state do I want to throw out.
First, I actually would like to know how CA got 75% voter participation in a state that was decided years ago while the rest of the nation(where the election was largely competitive) was at about 55%. Then I would point out that the reason the founders chose the current means of election is that they didn't want one state, overwhelmingly for one party, distorting the popular vote and deciding the election.
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Robert Stout
Member Avatar

jake58
Jan 5 2017, 02:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 09:40 PM
jake58
Jan 4 2017, 07:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 05:27 PM
ringotuna
Jan 4 2017, 03:43 PM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I'm not claiming that Trump did not win. Under our system he did.

But the statement that American's supported him is not necessarily true since more people voted for his opponent.
If you exclude California - 75% voter participation(?), rest of country 55%... Trump wins popular vote by over a million. I vote to exclude California as I don't want those tosspots picking our President ad nauseum.

So we will selectively disallow votes because they will turn the numbers away from our desired outcome. Hmmm, which Red state do I want to throw out.
First, I actually would like to know how CA got 75% voter participation in a state that was decided years ago while the rest of the nation(where the election was largely competitive) was at about 55%. Then I would point out that the reason the founders chose the current means of election is that they didn't want one state, overwhelmingly for one party, distorting the popular vote and deciding the election.
We can always depend on California to do perversity.......... :nana:
Jesus can raise the dead, but he can't fix stupid
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BuckFan

clone
Jan 5 2017, 01:47 PM
The "Russian Hacking" Story Changes Again

More importantly, however, the hearing comes hours after Reuters reported overnight that U.S. intelligence agencies obtained what they considered to be conclusive evidence after the November election that Russia provided hacked material from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks. However, in the latest change of the narrative, this time the allegation is that Russia provided the hacked data through a third party, three U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

Wikieaks was quick to highlight that according to the report, US officials admitted that the Wikileaks "source" was not Russia, and that the goal posts now shifted to the source's source:

n keeping with the theme of providing no proof to the general public, the officials declined to describe the intelligence obtained about the involvement of a third-party in passing on leaked material to WikiLeaks, saying they did not want to reveal how the U.S. government had obtained the information. So just trust them, please.

The shift in the narrative is curious because as a reminder, officials had concluded "months earlier" that Russian intelligence agencies had directed the hacking, but had been less certain that they could prove Russia also had controlled the release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. It now appears that along with lack of evidence, the attention has shifted to an "intermediary" as being the responsible party .

LINK
This is the same crap the Right pulled in the election when they were trying to confuse people to lie their way out of a bad situation.

Whether the Russians supplied the material directly to Wikileaks or through some 3rd party cut-out is immaterial. It is not changing the story, the Russians still stole the material and provided it to Wikileaks to affect the U.S. election. It also not the issue on whether they succeeded to change a vote but the fact is they tried.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jake58

BuckFan
Jan 5 2017, 03:25 PM
clone
Jan 5 2017, 01:47 PM
The "Russian Hacking" Story Changes Again

More importantly, however, the hearing comes hours after Reuters reported overnight that U.S. intelligence agencies obtained what they considered to be conclusive evidence after the November election that Russia provided hacked material from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks. However, in the latest change of the narrative, this time the allegation is that Russia provided the hacked data through a third party, three U.S. officials said on Wednesday.

Wikieaks was quick to highlight that according to the report, US officials admitted that the Wikileaks "source" was not Russia, and that the goal posts now shifted to the source's source:

n keeping with the theme of providing no proof to the general public, the officials declined to describe the intelligence obtained about the involvement of a third-party in passing on leaked material to WikiLeaks, saying they did not want to reveal how the U.S. government had obtained the information. So just trust them, please.

The shift in the narrative is curious because as a reminder, officials had concluded "months earlier" that Russian intelligence agencies had directed the hacking, but had been less certain that they could prove Russia also had controlled the release of information damaging to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. It now appears that along with lack of evidence, the attention has shifted to an "intermediary" as being the responsible party .

LINK
This is the same crap the Right pulled in the election when they were trying to confuse people to lie their way out of a bad situation.

Whether the Russians supplied the material directly to Wikileaks or through some 3rd party cut-out is immaterial. It is not changing the story, the Russians still stole the material and provided it to Wikileaks to affect the U.S. election. It also not the issue on whether they succeeded to change a vote but the fact is they tried.
That would be fine if they were going to offer some proof. Pushing out a heavily redacted report isn't going to do much to convince anyone who isn't already convinced... and I could care less what Clapper says, he already has a track record of lying directly to Congress.
That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CautionaryTales
Member Avatar

It won't change the election.
We just will have to live with this illegtimate President for awhile.
Edited by CautionaryTales, Jan 5 2017, 04:29 PM.


Have you paid your internet taxes?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Right-Wing
Member Avatar

jake58
Jan 5 2017, 02:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 09:40 PM
jake58
Jan 4 2017, 07:29 PM
BuckFan
Jan 4 2017, 05:27 PM
ringotuna
Jan 4 2017, 03:43 PM

Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
I'm not claiming that Trump did not win. Under our system he did.

But the statement that American's supported him is not necessarily true since more people voted for his opponent.
If you exclude California - 75% voter participation(?), rest of country 55%... Trump wins popular vote by over a million. I vote to exclude California as I don't want those tosspots picking our President ad nauseum.

So we will selectively disallow votes because they will turn the numbers away from our desired outcome. Hmmm, which Red state do I want to throw out.
First, I actually would like to know how CA got 75% voter participation in a state that was decided years ago while the rest of the nation(where the election was largely competitive) was at about 55%. Then I would point out that the reason the founders chose the current means of election is that they didn't want one state, overwhelmingly for one party, distorting the popular vote and deciding the election.
SAN PEDRO MAN FINDS DOZENS OF OFFICIAL VOTING BALLOTS OUTSIDE HOME

Two stacks of ballots that were found outside Jerry Mosna's home in San Pedro, Calif. (FoxNews.com)
Jerry Mosna was gardening outside his San Pedro, Calif., home Saturday when he noticed something odd: Two stacks of 2016 ballots on his mailbox.

The 83 ballots, each unused, were addressed to different people, all supposedly living in his elderly neighbor’s two-bedroom apartment.

“I think this is spooky,” Mosna said. “All the different names, none we recognize, all at one address.”

His wife, Madalena Mosna, noted their 89-year-old neighbor lives by herself, and, “Eighty people can’t fit in that apartment.”

Posted Image

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/03/voter-fraud-california-man-finds-dozens-ballots-stacked-outside-home.html
Donald Trump is Barack Obama's President!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
clone
Member Avatar
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
Oct: Comey and intel are partisan
Nov: Comey and intel are partisan
Dec/Jan: You must believe the intel community why do you hate America

Liberalism is a mental disorder.....
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
« Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com DOMESTIC U.S. news · Next Topic »
Add Reply