Donald Trump Backs Assange over Russian Hacking claims...

originally posted by: pteridine
As I have posted on another thread, why can't both be correct? The Russians hacking, along with who knows how many others, and the insider providing the emails to Assange could also be factual. Why assume that a Russian hack was the source of the emails?

Because our nations top intel specialist say so. Just like they said the China hacked the US Civil Servant Data base, and no claimed they were lying. Or, when they told us that N. Korea was behind the Sony hacks, and no one claimed they were lying.

a reply to: Xtrozero

You do know that there's a well documented history of Russia trying to undermine our government, don't you?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xtrozero

You do know that there's a well documented history of Russia trying to undermine our government, don't you?

True, not sure your point though. Russia hacks Everyone they can.. DNC, RNC, congress, private servers (couldn't pass that up), everyone, these are not only focused hacks on the DNC to undermined our elections with what happened to be true information in the end. It seems the only point is the democrats can not figure out network security...

I guess the big questions to you are... Do you think Trump is in bed with Russia, do think Russia main purpose if they were involved was to get Trump elected, do you think Assange is lying when he states his POC was not affiliated with Russia that started all this off.

So either Russia does it's normal hacks on everyone and got lucky or there was a salty insider not happy with The Burn getting really burned by the DNC and the end tool to do the job might have been Russian affiliated.

In both cases nothing had anything to do with Trump, and what we seen from Trump's backlash to all this is towards the liberals trying to connect him to Russia.

a reply to: windword

No need to defect Snowden was hacking using his job as a contract worker at the NSA to glean info for his profit. He fed this info to buyers in China and Russia. That is why he always had an illegal thumb drive or two on him.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Great. The very agencies he's going to need to help protect and defend our nation as his oath will require him to do and he's casting doubt on their capabilities not only to the American people but the entire world.

Hey guys this was what they were talking about when they said he was unfit to be president.

What happens when they give him info on a possible attack?

"Oh don't pay any attention to them....they were wrong once...we can't trust them. "

Tweeted of course.


And the world sits back and laughs as Putin's puppet takes office.

Just fabulous.

What hippie boat are you sailing in on?

Trump decides to make a presidential decision. Those sectors have nothing to do with his final thoughts and should always stand like this. Otherwise, what is the point of a president. I still cannot fathom how worried you and others are at the thought of Trump being in office. So ridiculous.

He for once seems to be a man that is choosing to do what is best for many not just a few unlike Obama and those before him. So get another paddle and sail back to cuckooland.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: pteridine
As I have posted on another thread, why can't both be correct? The Russians hacking, along with who knows how many others, and the insider providing the emails to Assange could also be factual. Why assume that a Russian hack was the source of the emails?

Because our nations top intel specialist say so. Just like they said the China hacked the US Civil Servant Data base, and no claimed they were lying. Or, when they told us that N. Korea was behind the Sony hacks, and no one claimed they were lying.

I am not saying they are lying. They have information that says the Russians [probably among many others] hacked the DNC.

The question is, did the Russians release the emails to WikiLeaks or were they from a second source? If the intel agencies were behind exposing Clinton corruption, they are not going to admit it, so they show that the Russians hacked the DNC and let everyone come to the conclusion that the Russians released the emails. Russia didn't want the confrontation that Hillary would bring and that can be claimed as a motive that people would believe.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I guess the big questions to you are... Do you think Trump is in bed with Russia, do think Russia main purpose if they were involved was to get Trump elected, do you think Assange is lying when he states his POC was not affiliated with Russia that started all this off.

Based on the interview with Sean Hannity, in my opinion Assange was dancing around the issue, badly, like Rick Perry on Dancing with Stars. I think he lied in the interview a few times, but mostly he tried to deflect from "The Russians did it" to "The Russians weren't the ones who gave it to me". He definitely appeared in that interview with Sean Hannity to defend Trump.

I do think that Putin exercised whatever power he could to undermine Hillary Clinton, going to far as to threaten the American people with war if she's elected, while pandering to Trump's ego.

I didn't want to think that Trump was in bed with Putin, more that he was enamored by Putin's flattery and blinded by his own ego. But the more he denied it and attacked the intel community and those who claimed it was Russia, getting so crazy defensive, the more it seems like he has something to hide.

the latest report from US intelligence agencies are saying The Russians did it, although they have failed to supply evidence in this cut-down report, maybe people should stop looking at things with a bias, and should try and see where this is going,
because this could be the start of something "BIG".


www.bbc.co.uk...

Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help Donald Trump win the presidential election, a US intelligence report says.
The unclassified report says the Russian leader "ordered" a campaign aimed at influencing the election.
Moscow has not commented, but Russia has previously denied the claims.
After being briefed on the findings, Mr Trump stopped short of accusing Russia of interfering, saying only that the election outcome was not affected.
Mr Trump later went on to blame "gross negligence" by the Democratic National Committee for "allowing" the hacking to take place.
Following the report's findings, the US Department of Homeland Security announced that voting machines and other election databases would be classified as "critical infrastructure" and given more protection from cyber-attacks.
The 25-page report says that the Kremlin developed a "clear preference" for Mr Trump.
Russia's goals, the document added, were to "undermine public faith" in the US democratic process and "denigrate" his Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton, harming her electability and potential presidency.
"We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election," it said.

The unclassified version contained no detailed evidence of Mr Putin's alleged role, but it said Russia's actions included:
Hacking into the email accounts of the Democratic National Committee and top Democrats;
Using intermediaries such as WikiLeaks, DCLeaks.com and Guccifer 2.0 persona to release the information acquired from the hackings;

Donald Trump has hinted at forming closer ties with Russia and Vladimir Putin
The report says Mr Putin liked Mr Trump because he had vowed to work with Russia and the Russian leader had had "many positive experiences working with Western political leaders whose business interests made them more disposed to deal with Russia, such as former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder".
In contrast, Mr Putin had blamed Mrs Clinton for inciting anti-government protests in 2011 and early 2012 "and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him".
The identities of the Russian agents allegedly directly responsible for the hack are known to US authorities but have not been released publicly, reports say, citing intelligence sources.
The document, a cut-down version of the classified report presented to President Barack Obama on Thursday, was released shortly after intelligence chiefs briefed Mr Trump on their findings.
Trump backs Julian Assange over hacking claim
Does Trump need a daily CIA briefing?
Since winning the election on 8 November, Mr Trump has repeatedly questioned US intelligence claims of Russian hacking. In a statement after the briefing, the president-elect declined to single out Russia, but said he had "tremendous respect for the work and service done" by those in the US intelligence community.
"While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organisations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election," he said.
"Whether it is our government, organisations, associations or businesses we need to aggressively combat and stop cyber-attacks. I will appoint a team to give me a plan within 90 days of taking office."
What Trump didn't say: Nick Bryant, BBC News, New York

It's an explosive report claiming the Russian government launched a massive, multi-faceted operation to sway the outcome of the US presidential election. After being briefed on the findings, Mr Trump issued a statement saying that the outcome of the election was not affected.
Tellingly he did not endorse the report's central finding that the Kremlin was behind the cyber campaign.
In his statement, he also expressed tremendous respect for US intelligence agencies. But in the lead-up to the meeting he was publicly scornful of American spies, in a manner completely unprecedented for a president-elect.
Earlier, he protested that the Russian hacking allegations were part of a political witch-hunt by political adversaries badly beaten, as he put it, in the election. He clearly thinks they're being used by his opponents to question the legitimacy of his presidency.

a reply to: BlackProject

I'm not alone in my worry. But I'm thinking I know stuff you don't.

a reply to: Davg80

Can someone tell me how they've kept the "Russian Hacker" scam going on TV for the past 3 months? Public attention span is usually about 3 days, tops.

a reply to: WowOkay

9 times out of 10 its because they are doing the "look here while we do something dodgy over here" thing.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xtrozero


Based on the interview with Sean Hannity, in my opinion Assange was dancing around the issue, badly, like Rick Perry on Dancing with Stars. I think he lied in the interview a few times, but mostly he tried to deflect from "The Russians did it" to "The Russians weren't the ones who gave it to me". He definitely appeared in that interview with Sean Hannity to defend Trump.

Hannity wanted more info and it was clear that Assange felt he gave too much already for his liking.

I do think that Putin exercised whatever power he could to undermine Hillary Clinton, going to far as to threaten the American people with war if she's elected, while pandering to Trump's ego.

I do not agree. Hillary is weaker of the two and would have been Obama 2.0. Looking at Obama, the Russians have basically done anything they wanted to do these last 8 years and so they would most likely do the same under Hillary, where Trump is a wild card that could go either way, so why not go with the known in Hillary ands just continue to do as they please?

a reply to: Xtrozero


I agree with you and I also agree that Hillary would have been Obama 2.0. That's why I voted for her. Not the best choice, but the only choice, in my book.

Trump represented everything I fear, the repeal, not an attempt to fix, of the ACA, attacking women's health issues and Roe V Wade, the likelihood of overturning same sex marriage and enforcing religious bias........banks and big oil gone wild.

Obama 2.0! Yep, that's what I voted for.

a reply to: windword

aww thats a shame, i bet there are many like you, change is not to be feared, the only thing that is to be feared is nothing.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xtrozero


I agree with you and I also agree that Hillary would have been Obama 2.0. That's why I voted for her. Not the best choice, but the only choice, in my book.

The problem is Hillary is not as smart as Obama so it would really not be 2.0. I don't think she is smart at all, she has 40 years in politics, so she got the lingo down, but as much as she has failed since even her college days she hides how true inept she is with her 40 years of playing in the political sand box.

Trump represented everything I fear, the repeal, not an attempt to fix, of the ACA, attacking women's health issues and Roe V Wade, the likelihood of overturning same sex marriage and enforcing religious bias........gone wild.

What fear could that be that is not just some Democrat hell on earth propaganda if Republicans are in control and not them.

First, ACA has hurt more Americans than it has helped. It was a great idea, but it was also a 2600 page mess that really didn't fix anything. It is getting worst every year if it is left in place as is with the next four years being extremely bad. The Republicans have said they will replace it not just do away with it, and Trump has already talked to Obama about the few good things that should continue. The fear would be Hillary just letting it rot on the tree until it finally dies on it's own. which it would anyways.

Do you really think Trump cares about what gays do? He talked to his Christian base a few times during the campaign with some half hearted political rhetoric, but he is not religious, and really cares little whether gays get married or not, same thing with birth control and Abortions, so I'm not sure were the religious bias would come from. This is 2017 and it doesn't matter who is in office, Roe V Wade will never be repealed and Gays will get married, if Bush didn't touch it no one will.

A lot of your fears just seem to be Democrat hell on earth propaganda if the Republicans gain control, but it is all a dead horse now and we need to let that finally rest in peace. What bothers me the most is your fears seem to be common and I would need to ask you why are these more important than so much more that is truly screwing up our country. The whole abortion, birth control, gays rights are just old news...let it all go...hehe

You want no banks and big oil? Well do a goggle search on Hillary and Bilderberg , or Hillary and big banks.... You don't get it do you? Hillary IS big business, that is who they supported... Trump got no support from any of them, no support from even the Republicans, he is not an insider at all and ALL insiders Democrats/Republicans/big business alike went against him.

Obama 2.0! Yep, that's what I voted for.

Was the last 8 years that good for you that you would just like another 8 more of the like? Wow, OK...I'm ready to just roll the dice on this one, it is not like Trump can do worst in my view...

originally posted by: WowOkay
a reply to: Davg80

Can someone tell me how they've kept the "Russian Hacker" scam going on TV for the past 3 months? Public attention span is usually about 3 days, tops.

Hollywood lost.... and they can not figure out why so it must be the Russians...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xtrozero


I agree with you and I also agree that Hillary would have been Obama 2.0. That's why I voted for her. Not the best choice, but the only choice, in my book.

The problem is Hillary is not as smart as Obama so it would really not be 2.0. I don't think she is smart at all, she has 40 years in politics, so she got the lingo down, but as much as she has failed since even her college days she hides how true inept she is with her 40 years of playing in the political sand box.

Trump represented everything I fear, the repeal, not an attempt to fix, of the ACA, attacking women's health issues and Roe V Wade, the likelihood of overturning same sex marriage and enforcing religious bias........gone wild.

What fear could that be that is not just some Democrat hell on earth propaganda if Republicans are in control and not them.

First, ACA has hurt more Americans than it has helped. It was a great idea, but it was also a 2600 page mess that really didn't fix anything. It is getting worst every year if it is left in place as is with the next four years being extremely bad. The Republicans have said they will replace it not just do away with it, and Trump has already talked to Obama about the few good things that should continue. The fear would be Hillary just letting it rot on the tree until it finally dies on it's own. which it would anyways.

Do you really think Trump cares about what gays do? He talked to his Christian base a few times during the campaign with some half hearted political rhetoric, but he is not religious, and really cares little whether gays get married or not, same thing with birth control and Abortions, so I'm not sure were the religious bias would come from. This is 2017 and it doesn't matter who is in office, Roe V Wade will never be repealed and Gays will get married, if Bush didn't touch it no one will.

A lot of your fears just seem to be Democrat hell on earth propaganda if the Republicans gain control, but it is all a dead horse now and we need to let that finally rest in peace. What bothers me the most is your fears seem to be common and I would need to ask you why are these more important than so much more that is truly screwing up our country. The whole abortion, birth control, gays rights are just old news...let it all go...hehe

You want no banks and big oil? Well do a goggle search on Hillary and Bilderberg , or Hillary and big banks.... You don't get it do you? Hillary IS big business, that is who they supported... Trump got no support from any of them, no support from even the Republicans, he is not an insider at all and ALL insiders Democrats/Republicans/big business alike went against him.

Obama 2.0! Yep, that's what I voted for.

Was the last 8 years that good for you that you would just like another 8 more of the like? Wow, OK...I'm ready to just roll the dice on this one, it is not like Trump can do worst in my view...

Well, I hate to be contrite, but women like Hillary, the wife of a former president, for all her education and political stamina, like all women, are relegated to the "sand box" of politics, just like women's rights.

A far as the ACA hurting American's, the American Insurance company's have been running out of control, to the detriment of American's health, for quite some time now. I dare to say that, at least, the ACA helped American Health Care more than it hurt. Reality stings. You'll see under tRumpcare.

a reply to: windword

the difference is Trumpy cares about the litto guy....

So insane that the right would believe any crazy old conspiracy such as Pizzagate yet refuse to believe a more legit one regarding Russian Interference.

Kind of like how they refuse to believe climate change (way more evidence) but believe Clinton has had people killed (barely any evidence).