RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Cole writes: "The US NSA hacked the whole world for many years until Ed Snowden blew the whistle on them. And that was when the full extent of Clapper's mendaciousness became clear. He should have been held in contempt of Congress. He should have been fired. But no. He got away with it."

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper Jr. takes his seat to testify before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on 'Foreign Cyber Threats to the United States' on Capitol Hill, Jan. 5, 2017. (photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper Jr. takes his seat to testify before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on 'Foreign Cyber Threats to the United States' on Capitol Hill, Jan. 5, 2017. (photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)


Circus of Liars: How Trump and GOP Are Twisted Into Pretzels Over Putin Hack

By Juan Cole, Informed Comment

08 January 17

 

onald J. Trump has picked another fight with the elders of his own Republican Party, over whether Russia engaged in hacking aimed at influencing the US election. Trump has maintained that it is impossible to trace hacking attempts, that it isn’t clear who was behind them, and that he knows a lot about hacking and knows things about these incidents that the rest of us do not know, which he would reveal last Tuesday or Wednesday (he didn’t).

At one point, in Trump’s assault on the case for Russian hacking being presented by the CIA, he cited statements of Julian Assange of Wikileaks:

This reference to Assange, who published Chelsea Manning’s copied State Department cables and who published emails of the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, infuriated official Washington, who would love to render Assange from the Ecuadoran embassy in London and execute him by firing squad.

At today’s Senate hearings on the Russian hacking, Sen. John McCain asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper whether Assange has any credibility. Clapper replied by smearing Assange with reference to the complicated and obscure Swedish sex charges against him, which actually do not speak to Assange’s credibility on whether the Russians passed him hacked emails. This ad hominem logical fallacy is typical of the sneaky and duplicitous way Clapper operates.

McCain also accused Assange of putting the lives of US intelligence professionals and their assets in danger. But McCain did not move to impeach former Bush vice president Dick Cheney, who outed CIA field officer Valerie Plame to punish her for her husband’s having revealed the emptiness of the WMD case for the Bush-Cheney illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Trump was wounded by the charges that he was supporting Assange, and replied, essentially, that retweets are not endorsements.

All twitter users consider such hedging to be disingenuous; why retweet something if you deeply disagree with it?

The entire circus was marked by outlandish self-contradiction and clownish hypocrisy.

For instance, Sen. McCain and other national security Republicans have a longstanding animus against the Putin government and so are eager to accept the Clapper case that Russia attempted to interfere in the US election.

But McCain and the other hawkish Republicans don’t want to follow their position to its logical conclusion, which is that Putin intervened to give us a Trump presidency.

If Russia did some hacking and leaking to hurt the Democrats, but did not succeed in having a big impact on the election outcome, then why is the issue so important? The Russians were ineffectual.

As for foreign hacking and spying on the US election, James Clapper for a long time was personally listening into German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s private cell phone.

Moreover, Clapper was listening in to millions Americans on American soil without a warrant, a gross violation of the fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which promises us privacy from government prying with regard to our mail and personal effects unless law enforcement can convince a judge that we are engaged in a specified crime. For all we know, US officials privy to this illegal form of wiretapping could have used the information for insider trading or self-aggrandizement or to smear politicians they didn’t like or even to affect the outcome of elections. There isn’t really any oversight over this unconstitutional activity of the Federal government, and even sitting senators who knew about it such as Ron Wyden were afraid to tell the public lest they be arrested for revealing classified information (almost everything in Washington is classified as soon as it is written down).

When Clapper was asked in Senate testimony whether US intelligence was spying on the American people, he denied it. “No,” he said.

Ron Wyden: “DNI Clapper tells Wyden the NSA does not collect data on millions of Americans”

It was the lie of our new century, the Big Lie, the ultimate Whopper.

The US NSA hacked the whole world for many years until Ed Snowden blew the whistle on them. And that was when the full extent of Clapper’s mendaciousness became clear. He should have been held in contempt of Congress. He should have been fired. But no. He got away with it.

It is extremely unclear why anyone should believe anything this proven and professional liar says.

Then Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, was asked about Trump’s tweet questioning the Russia hacking narrative. He replied that Trump was unwise to take on the intelligence community, since they had six ways to Sunday to get back at you.

So Schumer seems to have been celebrating that we are no longer a democracy, but that even an elected president has to defer to the intelligence establishment in Washington or else must fear that they will play dirty tricks on him and undermine him.

Shouldn’t the Democratic Party senate minority leader be standing for democratic values, not advising the president to shut up if he knows what’s good for him?

So to conclude, this is a sorry spectacle. Yes, Putin is a thug who should not have unilaterally annexed Crimea, and so created a European crisis that has yet to be resolved. But yes, the US has acted thuggishly– the unprovoked and monstrous invasion of Iraq is a recent example– and US aggressiveness toward Moscow after the collapse of the Soviet Union bears some of the blame for Russia’s bullying insecurity. And yes, Russia likely engaged in hacking during the US election and hoped to tilt the playing field toward Trump; but they likely failed to have any significant effect on the outcome. And yes, Clapper and other US intelligence officials have hacked everybody and his brother both abroad and inside the US, so they are hardly morally superior to Putin.

Now we have a food fight full of ignorance and hypocrisy or both, in which the Washington Establishment professes itself shocked, shocked that any hacking of one country by another could have gone on. Trump has continued his creepy bromance with the Kremlin and wants to get his information from any source that agrees with his prejudices. The Democrats have taken advantage of the story to paint Trump as a Manchurian candidate, and some of them seem to delight in the idea that Trump may provoke the CIA to do to him what Oliver Stone thinks it did to JFK.

Nobody and nothing here to admire.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+9 # Citizen Mike 2017-01-08 15:05
The Russian hacking might not have tilted the outcome of the election in any significant way. But it does prove that Trump was Russia's preferred candidate and that is significant. The Russians see him as a potential ally or an easy dupe, or both. They know he has massive business interests I Russia and is driven more by personal profit than by any idea of public service. I predict that Trump's partiality to Russian interests diverts him from defending American interests in the world and will lead to his impeachment.
 
 
+26 # ronnewmexico 2017-01-08 19:33
Assange then is lying and Clapper and them are telling the truth.

On what basis do you make this determination? past history perhaps?
 
 
-5 # molesoul 2017-01-09 18:23
Um, yeah, I'm taking the word of 17 agencies of the US government over one guy. I am not a big fan of the intelligence agencies, but come on, their history includes a lot more than their collective crimes and misdeeds over the last century.

Is there anyone else backing up Assange, other than Trump and Putin? No one with any credibility.
 
 
+8 # DogSoldier 2017-01-09 19:12
Apparently you know squat of the history of the CIA or the OSS. Perhaps, you should do some reading before you make blanket statements about intelligence agencies. There is very little, if anything, that they have accomplished over the past 70 years. It was one fiasco after another, and not a shred of honesty in the whole organization. They even lied to Presidents.

There are a whole lot of people backing up Assange. From ex-intelligence agents, to a ex-British ambassador who says that he picked up the documents in DC from a disgruntled Democrat.
 
 
+4 # desertprogressive 2017-01-09 23:10
At least the functions of OSS were honest as far as propaganda:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Strategic_Services

"Other OSS functions included the use of propaganda, subversion, and post-war planning."

Russia did not hack the elections, and they didn't hack Podesta's disgusting emails either. None of it affected the outcome of the elections. Other than the obvious reasons why HRC didn't win, in the last 10 days before the election, FBI Comey sent letter to lawmakers that new emails re HRC's case had surfaced, implying there would be serious new charges.

They need to stop the propaganda war against Russia! I think they will escallate instead.
 
 
+1 # Caliban 2017-01-11 01:51
Absolutely correct that nothing the "Russians" might have done was so criminally intended as James Comey's criminal misuse of office to sabotage the Clinton campaign.

Trump won't prosecute so useful a fellow GOP helpmate, but he should.
 
 
+15 # polfrosch 2017-01-09 07:42
I think you exactly outlined why this issue was planted in the first place. Chris Hedges has a compelling case, I think.

It´s ok to read this somewhat "shallow from the hip" Juan Cole article, but I wonder why the important article from Chris Hedges does not also appear on RSN. I used to find his articles on rsn.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_real_purpose_of_the_us_governments_report_on_alleged_hacking_by_russi

Something is more and more wrong with rsn. I will watch it for a month or two. If it stays this way, I will pull out.
 
 
+8 # Anonymot 2017-01-09 08:55
Perhaps, Mike, you live in a cave. Come out. There's a wee bit of fresh air left. I was in Boston, Savannah, Portugal, the UK, and France in the last 12 months. I read the US, French, and UK papers online every day. Almost all of the world's Presidents, dictators, etc. preferred ANYONE but Hillary. She was seen as a weak, warmonger, responsible for the destruction of the Middle East and therefore for the invasion of Turkey and Europe by millions of refugees. She was considered a dupe of the CIA.

Those people didn't care about our internal problems except to the extent that they are contagious worldwide.

So what's your point about Putin? Or do you like our Joe McCarthy-style Intelligence crowd who are dying to do a regime change war with Russia and China?

We do not yet know what will really come from a Trump controlled administration. Domestically there will be damage, but if you prefer the continuation of Medicare so that everyone in the fully paid hospital wards can receive a little atomic radiation from a regime change opponent, well we're not on the same page.

Uncertainty is appropriate. Hysteria is not. Please forget the anti-Putin idiocy. The fresh air will help.
 
 
+1 # molesoul 2017-01-09 18:07
"She was considered a dupe of the CIA."

"...McCarthy-style Intelligence crowd who are dying to do a regime change war with Russia and China?"

"...if you prefer the continuation of Medicare so that everyone in the fully paid hospital wards can receive a little atomic radiation from a regime change opponent."

Dude, your post is the epitome of hysteria. What the hell do you mean by "the continuation of Medicare so that everyone in the fully paid hospital wards can receive a little atomic radiation from a regime change opponent"? (I presume you meant to say 'proponent')

Are you saying that Clinton and the CIA are so bent on destroying the world that Medicare is of little consequence? Are you comparing safety-net health care for the elderly - which I have been paying into for decades and which my dear mother depends on for chemotherapy - to "a little atomic radiation?" And what is that?

Hyperbole has it's place in political rhetoric, but when you overdo it, the result is hysteria. I know because I've been called on it myself...
 
 
+2 # goodsensecynic 2017-01-09 13:15
Quoting Citizen Mike:
Trump's partiality to Russian interests ... will lead to his impeachment.


I have my doubts.

What I do not doubt, however, is that FBI Director Comey's late intervention into the election campaign to raise more concerns about Hillary Clinton's "damned emails" DID have an effect.

Whether (combined with GOP "shenanigans" in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania) it would have been enough to tilt the anti-democratic Electoral College toward Ms. Clinton and have her replace Mr. Trump is one of those imponderables by the intolerables that will never be answered (rather like the question: Who REALLY shot JFK?).

It is, however, something that should not just be shrugged off like a Twump Tweet.
 
 
+6 # lfeuille 2017-01-09 18:01
So what? Of course they preferred him to Hillary would just about couldn't utter a complete sentence without Russia bashing.
 
 
+67 # DongiC 2017-01-08 15:09
Clapper and company have a credibility problem. Putin also. Trump too. Ditto the NSA and the CIA. We have become an empire; our democracy is gone. The faulty elections we have is just one more proof of this overwhelming fact.
 
 
+28 # ronnewmexico 2017-01-08 15:28
Everyone on the left gives up the Crimea thing as this author does as well.

It is like everyone knows a part of a thing but do not put it all together.
We'll they lie here but not there I guess is the thinking. Folks they lie everywhere,get used to it.
The Ukraine had a constitution with a impeachment clause. There was to be a comittee of invesetigation set up to review the chages and then to report to their legislative body. They did none of this they just had a vote. So they violated the constitution. And the second act of the body was to outlaw russian as the language of any trade or governmental action, which was veteod by their new president.

But Crimea is all Russian virtually(due to Stalins genocide of tartars) and the deposed leader was a man of the Russians.

The constitution was no longer in force so why should Crimea honor it? A vote was held and as Crimea is about 90 plus percent Russia of course they voted out of the Ukraine and into Russia. They are Russians. Stalin located them there and killed tartars to make room.

It was clear to the Crimeans what was going to happen. Genocide revenge upon the Russians for Stalins actions years ago is what was going to happen with no politicial representation.
And th3e US did what they could to incite this as the leader was going to sign a economic pact with Russia not the EU
 
 
-37 # PaulK 2017-01-08 16:03
A CBS Evening News report showed that nobody at all was voting to re-attach the Crimea to Russia. Still, Russia magically won in a landslide. We're not the only country with consistently rigged elections.
 
 
+29 # ronnewmexico 2017-01-08 17:22
CBS evening news?
you trust MSM? CNN just had a noteable security analyst with credentials say Julian Assange is a pedaphile….beli eve he ls?

One look at the demographics of Cromea and one finds it is very large majority russian. Stalin reemoved and killed most of the tartars subsequent to the end of world war 2. Tartars were the majority population of Crimea prior to WW2. It was genocide what Stalin did. But thfe result was a overwhelmingly russian CRimea. He encouraged Russians to move there to displace the Tartars he deported and killed.

And the Tartars who were now gradually returning reefused to participate in the voting. As they remained a small minority and had no hope of moving the vote.

Their man was who was deposed in a coup. And the legislative body had just had a vote that outlawed Russian as a legitimate language in the Ukraine.

What in your logic, not the talking heads logic, supposes they would not vote to join Russia to protect from the nationalists of the Ukraine that had stolen power?

The nationalists want revenge for the actions of long ago, of Stalin.
 
 
+16 # lfeuille 2017-01-08 23:30
What? They polled the 3 Crimeans who didn't want to rejoin Russia?
 
 
+10 # polfrosch 2017-01-09 07:30
That is simply bullshit. CBS reported that? Please send the link, I will have to show that to some people to prove what the state of the media is in the USA.

And they dare to speak about "fake news"?
 
 
+22 # Radscal 2017-01-09 02:02
And Crimea had been part of Russia itself from the 1700s until 1954 when Khrushchev (an ethnic Ukrainian) "gifted" it to Ukraine.

It was really only part of a sovereign Ukraine for 22 years.

Further, the people of Crimea held 3 or so referendums after Ukraine declared independence from the USSR, and overwhelmingly wanted to secede from Ukraine and rejoin Russia. It was Russia who refused to allow it.

From what I've read, Stalin did ethnically cleanse a good number of Tartars after WW II (they had aligned with the Nazis). Chances are a good number of them met unsavory ends. Stalin had no qualms about having his enemies treated brutally and murdered. But a goodly number remained, and others moved back later.
 
 
+7 # Salus Populi 2017-01-09 14:32
Thanks to all of you for the accurate information on the Crimea situation.

What frosted the U.S., while not the [hypocritical, given the U.S.'s support for Kosovo's secession from Serbia just a few years ago, which it also pressured the World Court to endorse] "official" reason, was that the entire regime change -- led by neo-Nazis, not so incidentally -- was pursued by the U.S. with the intention of depriving the Russians of their sole warm water naval port at Sevastopol on the coast of the Black Sea.

Crimea's vote to return to Russia bollixed up the works, and foiled the plot -- an unforgivable slight, to the Masters of Mankind who run the U.S. as a global terrorist.

The wisdom of the Slavic people in Crimea was confirmed by the May Day butchery in Odessa, wherein the Praviy Sektor and Svoboda militias -- both of which publicly celebrate the pogroms that took place when the Nazis and their local allies controlled the country -- chased the peaceful demonstrators in that city into a workers' hall, and then set fire to the building and shot or clubbed to death any of the Russians who managed to climb out the windows. There are pictures of the aftermath of the carnage on the Internet, but they are horrifying enough that I will spare you the link.

Crimeans returning home on a bus were stopped a few days before by the fascist thugs, and beaten, and told that their compatriots would be dealt with.
 
 
+12 # PaulK 2017-01-08 15:59
One or two generations ago, U.S. interference in the politics of other countries always went one way. We can't do that now because we're a third world country. Both political parties have no problem with being American turncoats, doing the bidding of various foreign dictators-for-l ife. The difference is, which foreign potentate?

I don't expect the dictators to all line up in favor of one party over the other. Our country has grown too puny and too corrupt for that. Instead, cartels of individual geopolitical and economic players are going to form on each side.

No, your vote doesn't count.
 
 
+31 # CDMR 2017-01-08 17:56
Clapper is a dead-ender. In 12 days, he will cease to exist. This is his only last chance to appear relevant. McCain is only masturbating for the cameras -- again. In 12 days, this whole non-story will disappear into the digisphere. People will look back on it and think what a weird spasm of vindictiveness the loser democrats imposed on the nation.

There is no proof now and there will never be any proof. Assange told the truth. So did Craig Murray who says he knows who the leaker of Podesta's emails are. Like the mysterious "Deep Throat" someday this leaker will come out and shame the entire US "Intelligence" apparatus and idiots like Clapper.
 
 
-11 # Tigre1 2017-01-09 10:49
Ah, now you're SURE that Assange 'told the truth'.

Been sure long, huh?
 
 
+10 # Salus Populi 2017-01-09 14:37
Can you cite one independent source that Assange has lied in the past? Can you cite a single such source that claims the CIA has never done so?



I thought not.
 
 
+24 # anthraxripple 2017-01-08 22:14
The whole point of this is to play a card.

Rather than dealing with the very real reasons why Hillary lost the election, those who were counting on her ability to "play ball", are now faced with their second best card to play:

the "Russians' fault" card.

They tried the "sexist" card against anybody who stood in their way (including young women who preferred Sanders), but they couldn't make the sale.

Now, their inability to learn and adapt requires them to come up with another excuse, and card to play.

Making the GOP "uncomfortable" is more important to them than actually WINNING in 2, or 4, or 8 years.

What do you expect?

It took the left a few DECADES to finally learn our lesson and stop rewarding their contempt for us with unearned votes.

It'll probably take them a few decades to learn that they need to win us back if they EVER expect us to "waste a vote" on them again.
 
 
-5 # Tigre1 2017-01-09 10:51
Win 'us' back? I sincerely wish Lincoln had hung the breeding stock at Appamattox. ALL of it. Win THAT.
 
 
+20 # anachronis 2017-01-08 22:16
I regret Juan Cole's article, because it assumes Putin, or Russia, hacked what the Obama administration alleges. Mr. Cole's work had earned my great respect, until this piece.

The CIA, NSA, and FBI have not presented any evidence that might support the allegation that Putin or Russia engaged in the alleged hacking.

See my comments posted at http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/41278-chief-of-staff-now-says-trump-is-not-denying-russia-was-behind-hacking-campaign

Compare several here-cogent comments of Kropotkinesque, whose comments I have reviewed because of the bizarre treatment some of his comments have received from others posting comments at Reader Supported News. See particularly these:

Kropotkinesque 2016-12-15 16:14
through
Kropotkinesque 2016-12-15 16:16
at
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/40829-trumps-russian-hand

and

Kropotkinesque 2016-12-30 21:05
Kropotkinesque 2016-12-30 21:06
Kropotkinesque 2016-12-30 21:07
at
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/41112-were-living-through-the-first-world-cyberwar-but-just-havent-called-it-that
 
 
-14 # Jaax88 2017-01-09 00:10
Hasn't trump today now admitted or accepted the claim of Russian hacking as true? Or maybe that is fake news or MSM spin? It hard anymore to know the truth. Although I would not necessarily accept the fact the Assange and Murray were telling the truth unless they were under oath and having been cross-examined.
 
 
+8 # anachronis 2017-01-09 00:26
Jaax88 2017-01-09 00:10

Read and learn:
anachronis 2017-01-08 21:25
and
anachronis 2017-01-08 21:43
at
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/41278-chief-of-staff-now-says-trump-is-not-denying-russia-was-behind-hacking-campaign
 
 
+18 # Radscal 2017-01-09 02:28
Cole has long struck me as controlled opposition... awaiting down votes ;-)

Like all such, he often unveils or analyzes events quite accurately, and so brings much important information to his readers.

But, also like all such, there are certain boundaries beyond which he will never step.

Like with any source, we just need to weigh each bit of information in relation to other sources and come as close as we can to ascertaining reality.

His point that Senate Minority Leader Schumer told us that Deep State can have their way with any of is, including a President (and that he's just fine with that) was worth the price of admission alone.

How many will realize what that really means is questionable.
 
 
+10 # anachronis 2017-01-09 04:36
Radscal 2017-01-09 02:28

"How many will realize what that really means is questionable."

In the later 1960s and early 1970s, the left knew. But it aged, and forgot.

What of the new left, the young "progressives"? Will they, too, not remember, as they achieve their personal desires?

I forgive them now, as I forgave my friends of youth. Age is erosion. Only empathy deserves our faith.
 
 
+9 # librarian1984 2017-01-09 17:09
I don't think the millennials are naive at all. The Clinton campaign played mean and dirty, stole the nomination and treated them like dirt. They were corralled, shoved and shunned at the convention.

I think they got quite a political education this cycle.
 
 
+5 # anachronis 2017-01-09 18:13
librarian1984 2017-01-09 17:09

"I think they got quite a political education this cycle."

They did in 1968, too, and then perhaps stronger than in 2016. Then came Nixon's pardon and Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and Reagan and the first Bush and Bill Clinton, all deserving rabbid protest and stronger opposition, which barely occurred. And when the Court stole the election for GW Bush, the reaction-noise was not much louder than a peep (especially from Gore).

Yes. The DNC, Hillary and her campaign and the neoliberal/neoc on press and several states' Primary election system managers screwed Sanders flagrantly. But Sanders betrayed his supporters, and many betrayed supporters voted for Hillary.

Now the noise is anti-Trump babble much more than [very much deserved] condemnation of the Democrat Establishment.

Trump's victory (and Ross Perot's showing) seem to teach that non-Establishme nt candidates can win. I expect Perot would have honored his promises and run a clean, sensitive government. But the public preferred to believe a pathological liar and psychopath (Clinton).

And Trump? I want to hope that he will honor at least half of the good (some even progressive) policies he stated during his campaign. But will he constrain his cabinet picks and other high administration nominees to honor those policies? [Did he select them just for their brains, or for their contemnible politics and greed?]
 
 
-1 # Jaax88 2017-01-10 13:34
If you do not like pathological liars and psychopaths why is it when you have a chance to oppose them you give even backed-handed support to trump, an unabashed liar and a clear psychopathic personality?
 
 
0 # James38 2017-01-13 00:04
anachronis, could you explain this comment you just slipped in as if noone would question it?

"But Sanders betrayed his supporters,..."?

How do you see that?
 
 
+4 # Salus Populi 2017-01-09 14:42
In particular, he was [and as far as I know to the contrary, remains] a strong supporter of the disastrous "regime change" [and torture-death of the former ruler] of Libya.
 
 
0 # anachronis 2017-01-09 15:28
Salus Populi 2017-01-09 14:42

"...he was [and as far as I know to the contrary, remains] a strong supporter of the disastrous "regime change" [and torture-death of the former ruler] of Libya."

You seem to refer to Juan Cole. If so, I find your assertion at least surprising. Will you, please, cite sources that show, with reliable quotes of Cole, that Cole did support what you assert?

Thank you.
 
 
+16 # Cdesignpdx 2017-01-09 00:54
Wow, Clapper disses Assange citing the Swedish sex scandals
that buzz around him. Careful Mr. Clapper, those same charges have been around our president elect for quite some time, but his goon squad made sure that the woman who filed the charges against DJT was exposed, threatened and harassed to the point of dropping charges. I wonder who hacked the dept. of justice web site to find out who the anonymous party was. The Russians?
 
 
+14 # kath 2017-01-09 05:34
There are only two things we know for sure:
1) Hillary Clinton and her insider Democrats ran a deeply corrupt, arrogant and incompetent campaign;
2) Hillary Clinton and her insider Democrats either didn't care about cybersecurity or wouldn't recognize it if they met it in the road wearing a sign. What else did these people circulate on such easily hackable media?
 
 
+7 # librarian1984 2017-01-09 09:56
Really. Look at all the telecomm problems Hillary and DWS had .. phones, servers, laptops, campaign database access, email security.

Maybe the Clinton campaign couldn't find reputable, competent people who would do their hackery.

Someone mentioned a while ago that the RNC blocking the same hack may be false -- that hackers, perhaps Russia, perhaps a 14-yo, have a lot of dirt on the GOP now, that might be used to manipulate them.

Lots going on.
 
 
+1 # Tigre1 2017-01-09 10:59
Librarian...hop ety-hope hope...unreveal ed recently-hacked REptilian National Committee EVIDENCE!

Now that is a cheerful note. Thank you.
 
 
+6 # librarian1984 2017-01-09 17:10
That's me. Spreading sunshine wherever I go.
 
 
+7 # Bruce Gruber 2017-01-09 12:46
If I recall correctly, Debbie Wassermann Schultz's nephew was a player in the tech security firm that 'handled' DNC servers. Cannot recall if the relationship extended to Hillary's tech (whom I believed 'helped' with erasures). Plus, I don't recall reading reports of Bernie's lawsuit demanding investigation and reporting by the DNC.
 
 
-10 # Tigre1 2017-01-09 10:57
There are other things we know much more surely.
1) that HRC has NEVER been legally charged with ANYTHING. All you blabbermouths are just expelling belly gas from between your wishful, lying lips.

2) Your scientific methods are questionable. How do you decide that a person wouldn't recognize 'cybersecurity' ...is it an elf, or ride on an elephants jowl-sag? Would YOU recognize 'cybersecurity' yourself? Do you use multiple flashing images?

I asked 'Cybersecurity' , but it doesn't know YOU. Not at ALL.
 
 
+11 # Salus Populi 2017-01-09 14:48
"1) that HRC has NEVER been legally charged with ANYTHING."

Not to put too fine a point on it, but neither was Bush or Cheney or Rumsfelt; nor, despite his crimes against humanity in the form of the "kill lists" and drone strikes, was or has been Obama. Indeed, despite a very large number of cumulative crimes, I defy you to find *any* U.S.presidentia l candidate or president who was charged with a crime.
 
 
+10 # Radscal 2017-01-09 17:05
And one of the worst war criminals of our time -Henry Kissinger - was given the frigging Nobel Peace Prize, and was just awarded the Distinguished Public Service Award by the Obama Administration!

Also, Susan McDougal went to prison because she refused to testify against the Clintons.
 
 
+5 # pro54 2017-01-09 19:38
"1) that HRC has NEVER been legally charged with ANYTHING. All you blabbermouths are just expelling belly gas from between your wishful, lying lips."
Arsinine logic:
And how many cops who murdered black people have been charged with anything?
and speaking of it, what has Trump been charged with?
 
 
+8 # Bruce Gruber 2017-01-09 06:42
As the "Deep State"/'establi shment'/oligarc hs worry about where to hide their gold and platinum, bonds and worldwide property deeds, conscript militarized police departments, and hire more intimidating security goons - the 'average' world citizen can hear the sucking sound of the "fruits of their labor" being pulled into the whirlpool of economic Hell the minions of oligarchy have set in motion.

Laws, governments, 'public' policies, and warfare are randomly manipulated to resist the growing mass awareness exemplified by Occupy, the Arab Spring(s), Tieneman Square, Black Lives Matter, public rioting and looting, and the election of Donald Trump. Defending the castles against the growing public dissatisfaction with the amoral greed of insider, gangster capitalism is an increasingly fearful cost of maintaining and 'growing "The System".

Our current misinformation campaign of finger-pointing at Russia exposes the childish, patronizing, self-smugness of implied aristocratic superiority. The more the subservient, wholly owned MSM wildly thrashes in search of an escape route, the more obvious the corporate, Fascist control of an irrational narrative. Trump's 140-character Tweets ignore and expose their levels of 'control' and build disrespect, resentment, and potential upheaval.

At the global scale, organizations like the World Bank, United Nations, and World Court exemplify the resisting, 'influential' inertia of the power of accumulated wealth.

(more)
 
 
+8 # Bruce Gruber 2017-01-09 07:07
Actual governments - whether bribed dictatorships, pseudo-democrac ies, or bureaucratized monarchies - founder in the morass of contrived 'exchange' complexity and "value" assessments and 'trade' equity - unable to address the societal aspirations and environmental degradation of a (mostly) passive planet and its inhabitants.

The corporate and 'enforcement' minions afforded the 'security' of paid implementation and maintenance of the system of wealth inequality that IS POWER, operate competitively like desperate squirrels in a spinning cage of threat, dismissal, or replacement. Bribing, buying, enforcing and ensuring laws, rules, policies, regulations, taxation, and their promoted misinterpretati ons doesn't fit prophetic admonitions considering "the least among you" ... but paradise in a "heavenly realm" - as the ultimate escape from the reality of Earthly existence, subservience and penury - remains the "back story" of oligarchy control of the masses.

Trump's Tweets (140 character simplicity) are bringing 'home' a significant 'adjustment'. The Hillary/JEB! fiasco of stupid, simplistic arrogance has opened wounds that seem impervious to the triple-antibiot ic-ointment of Madson Avenue manipulation. "Blaming the Russians" represents the conflict between greedy desire for war profit (Neocons) and their rationalization of self-righteous leadership - presumably exposable by the "substance" of emails.

If SMART, oligarchs would solve problems, not create them.
 
 
0 # Jaax88 2017-01-10 13:41
hat is your proposal for good and decent government and how to get there?
 
 
+4 # drew 2017-01-09 09:10
This group of jackals is just plain twisted (in every respect)!! G_d save us ....
 
 
+3 # Bruce Gruber 2017-01-09 13:01
Methinks "G_d" and his/her Earthly minions are a subset of the Apocalypse-wiel ding, eternal-paradis e-promising, original, direct descendent-clai ming directors of democratic, republican, Caesar-ish generals, local tribal chief warfare, and crusading amalgamation of wealth and power.

Millennia pass and little changes. Joseph, Mary and the ever-important infants still produce taxes and conscripts. Potentates and their clergy pray for victory and the souls of the fools who fight and die for their righteous assertions. The rest of us 'rabble' continue trying to figure out how to break the cycle of reptilian greed and competition from which evolution fails to free us.
 
 
+6 # Philothustra 2017-01-09 09:10
We should assume that everybody involved lies, or they wouldn't be in the thick of this web of deceit- Clapper's lie was simply the most egregious... Notice that he is hightailing it out of town now, before Team Trump turns on the
"intelligence community" And yes, everyone in DC knows how much the deep state has on them-- every call, email, procured service, secret vice, any dirt for political blackmail.

"Pseudo-democracy" perfectly describes our American electoral process today, but it has been upended by a digital fiasco-- a canary-haired constantly tweeting US president who conducts policy through his smart phone.
Seems to me the Oligarchs of the US cabinet ARE "smart" at promoting their own disproportionat e interests-just not at addressing the real human problems of the other 99.9 percent of us, in which they are not the least bit interested...
 
 
+7 # walthe310 2017-01-09 10:09
Oliver Stone is not the only person who thinks that the CIA was involved in JFK's death. That is why I advocate abolishing the CIA even if they are correct about Russian hacking. We have enough other intelligence agencies that are not involved in regime change here and abroad.
 
 
-5 # Tigre1 2017-01-09 11:02
Oliver Stone has many accomplishments that prove his capability as a man with a talent for organizing and telling a tale.

Not much else impresses me about him. Puts his pants on one leg at a time, probably.
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2017-01-09 17:21
I don't know much about Stone except his oeuvre, which I find to be quite impressive.

I think his best work was/is "The Untold History of the US" (both book and documentary series) which he created in collaboration with the historian Peter Kuznick.

As for his film, "JFK," I suggest you look into Colonel Fletcher Proudy, the real USian hero who was the "Mr. X" in Stone's film.
 
 
+6 # Nominae 2017-01-09 18:42
Quoting Tigre1:
Oliver Stone has many accomplishments that prove his capability as a man with a talent for organizing and telling a tale.

Not much else impresses me about him. Puts his pants on one leg at a time, probably.


OH, KittyKat9, that must have been *YOU that had Stone's Six out in the swamps, jungles and rice paddies of Viet Nam !

U B Bada$$, alright ! ;-D

In addition, Stone displays a level of talent, intelligence, sophistication and class that simply surpasses the *comprehension level of *some of our "judges" here with the Certified-Room- Temperature IQs like KittyKat9.

The *empty and useless fact that Stone fails to "impress" you, *clearly speaks *volumes more about *YOU than it does about Stone. ;-D :-D
_
 
 
0 # mblockhart 2017-01-09 12:45
No pleasure should be taken in the clash of the fascists now ongoing. The people it will hurt most were just starting to see a little daylight. The problem is that their only bulwark was the Presidency. For 4 years that is lost and we have to fight hard to make it only 4.
However, the data from the election rather clearly indicate that Russian theft of private conversations (they were not government documents) spun into propaganda had a significant effect on the ELECTORAL COLLEGE results. One of the tactics of fascism is the "politics of personal destruction" which has been on steroids for all to see with the fascist teapublicans. The Russian propaganda spread this unseen and unaware into the politics of the left - the green party and Sanders campaigns. Together with Republican use of another fascist tactic, voter suppression, this turned the tide against Clinton in a few key swing states and against Democrats generally. It put her in a vise squeezed from all sides such that even a significant win in the popular vote couldn't preserve the American democratic tradition. The electoral college itself is a fascist artifact. Investigation of the Russian intrusion dealt only with means, methods and motives, not conclusions as to whether it had any effect on outcome. And whether it had an effect or not it still must be dealt with and stopped. It should not simply be equated with the whistleblower exposure of government secrets.
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2017-01-09 17:28
There is zero evidence that any of the communications and other data published by Wikileaks is fraudulent. In fact, both HRC and John Podesta have acknowledged that some of it was their actual words.

So, once again, if the truth causes "personal destruction," it's not the fault of the messenger.

Yes, the Republicans use a whole range of election fraud techniques, and have for decades. Too bad the Democrats didn't think that worthy of confronting and resolving.

Maybe finally now, people will demand that our election process be made legitimate.
 
 
+3 # lfeuille 2017-01-09 18:19
"Maybe finally now, people will demand that our election process be made legitimate."

I wish, but it's not getting any play in the MSM so I don't think enough people know about it to bring pressure on the establishment to fix it. The media is too distracted by phantom Russian hackers to cover the real problem with our elections.
 
 
+4 # DogSoldier 2017-01-09 19:52
That won't do any good, the establishment likes things just the way they are. They have spent oodles of money and years of time in making them as screwed up as they are.
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2017-01-11 08:15
An unintended consequence of this Russian hacking nonsense COULD be the demand for hand counting and paper ballots.

We need leaders taking advantage of these opportunities, like a liberal Rush Limbaugh. Bernie can't do everything.
 
 
0 # tr4302@gmail.com 2017-01-15 15:12
A little too late to complain.Listen to Andy Borowitz!!

When my daughter came home, I sat her down at the kitchen table, gave her a Kit Kat from her hoard of Halloween candy, and offered this explanation of the election: “Imagine the stupidest thing you could ever do, like peeing on a stack of pancakes. Now, imagine that the United States is a stack of pancakes. Millions of grownups just peed on it.”
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN