U.S. 2018 elections 'under attack' by Russia - U.S. intelligence chief

[Khun Han]

12 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Indeed. Often phrased as "don't feed the troll".

 

If you don't take the argument to Russian trolls, don't complain when people start believing them.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Your solution is ridiculous. Shutting them bown, and keeping them shut down would be (to coin an old adage) like braiding mist.

 

We're talking about Russia, aren't we? Extensive sanctions are already in place. Not stopping the trolls though, are they?

Shutting the trolls down is ridiculous, but chasing after tens of thousands of troll posts while the trolls generate thousands more is a good idea?  Are you a professional troll looking out for himself?

 

The sanctions put in place because of Russian hostility and land grabs in the Ukraine are the reason why Russia wanted Trump to be President.  Trump has refused to impose sanctions authorized by Congress for the election interference.

[heybruce]

28 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

That's the latest sanctions, which Trump says (apparently correctly) are unconstitutional.

 

www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/08/trump_says_the_russia_sanctions_bill_is_unconstitutional_he_s_mostly_right.html

And what sanctions has Trump proposed for the election meddling?

[Morch]

32 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

If you don't take the argument to Russian trolls, don't complain when people start believing them.

 

If you answer every loon, every conspiracy theorist and every bigot, you lend undue credibility to their "arguments". All the more so, when actual answers aren't usually as simplistic as some make them to be.

Edited February 14, 2018 by Morch

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, heybruce said:

And what sanctions has Trump proposed for the election meddling?

 

Or put in another way, it takes some doing for an administration to achieve such a level of distrust, causing representatives to feel the need for such provisions.

[isaanbanhou]

6 minutes ago, heybruce said:

And what sanctions has Trump proposed for the election meddling?

He will not ride bare chested behind Putin on Putin's horse

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, isaanbanhou said:

He will not ride bare chested behind Putin on Putin's horse

That's a good setup line.

[Khun Han]

26 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

If you answer every loon, every conspiracy theorist and every bigot, you lend undue credibility to their "arguments". All the more so, when actual answers aren't usually as simplistic as some make them to be.

 

But we're not talking about loons or conspiracy theorists, are we? We're tolking about state-organised propaganda, which has allegedly influenced the results of democratic votes.

[heybruce]

11 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

But we're not talking about loons or conspiracy theorists, are we? We're tolking about state-organised propaganda, which has allegedly influenced the results of democratic votes.

And which the President denies happens.  Even though all of the US intelligence services confirmed happened, and stated that it will happen again.

 

The President will not take action against something that he denies happened, so, as much as Trump can arrange, Russia has license to interfere again.

[Khun Han]

26 minutes ago, heybruce said:

And which the President denies happens.  Even though all of the US intelligence services confirmed happened, and stated that it will happen again.

 

The President will not take action against something that he denies happened, so, as much as Trump can arrange, Russia has license to interfere again.

 

Has Trump stopped the security services from acting on their information? Could he even legally do so?

[heybruce]

20 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Has Trump stopped the security services from acting on their information? Could he even legally do so?

You mean did he fire the FBI director who was leading the investigation?  Yes.  Has he tried to discredit the investigation?  Yes.  Is he building a case to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein and replace him with someone who will fire Mueller?  It looks that way.

 

Trump doesn't have to stop the security services from acting on their information; the only response to clear evidence of Russian meddling is political, the FBI can't go into Russia and arrest people.  It certainly appears that Trump wants to end the investigation and take no action against Russia.

 

Of course with the security services in agreement that Russia meddled in the last election and is attempting to do so in the upcoming election, Trump can and should take actions now against Russia.  Gee, I wonder why he won't do that?

[sirineou]

28 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Has Trump stopped the security services from acting on their information? Could he even legally do so?

Are you serious ? Where have you being? 

Isn't this whole thing about investigations of the above subject, allegations of  obstruction of such investigations ,  inactivity of the president to impose punitive sanctions voted by a bipartisan congressional vote, and no action to prevent new interference.    

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

You mean did he fire the FBI director who was leading the investigation?  Yes.  Has he tried to discredit the investigation?  Yes.  Is he building a case to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein and replace him with someone who will fire Mueller?  It looks that way.

 

Trump doesn't have to stop the security services from acting on their information; the only response to clear evidence of Russian meddling is political, the FBI can't go into Russia and arrest people.  It certainly appears that Trump wants to end the investigation and take no action against Russia.

 

Of course with the security services in agreement that Russia meddled in the last election and is attempting to do so in the upcoming election, Trump can and should take actions now against Russia.  Gee, I wonder why he won't do that?

 

The investigation Trump is fighting is the slanted one against him personally, not the one regarding Russian trolls. Comey deserved to be fired for allowing his original findings into Crooked Hillary to be watered down, alone. And his handling of the Trump investigation warranted it too, after saying one thing to his president about the infamous dossier,  while his people were saying something different to the FISA court. Rosenstein probably deserves firing for being in on the deception.

 

You previously said Trump is stopping the investigation into Russian internet trolls. Now you are prevaricating. Is he stopping it, or isn't he? If you think he is, please provide some proof.

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The investigation Trump is fighting is the slanted one against him personally, not the one regarding Russian trolls. Comey deserved to be fired for allowing his original findings into Crooked Hillary to be watered down, alone. And his handling of the Trump investigation warranted it too, after saying one thing to his president about the infamous dossier,  while his people were saying something different to the FISA court. Rosenstein probably deserves firing for being in on the deception.

 

You previously said Trump is stopping the investigation into Russian internet trolls. Now you are prevaricating. Is he stopping it, or isn't he? If you think he is, please provide some proof.

How is the investigation personally targeting Trump?  The investigation is into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.  Since two of the five foreign advisers in the Trump campaign, Carter Page and George Papadopoulis, were "persons of interest" to the FBI because of their Russia connections, possible collusion was a very reasonable fear.

 

I agree Comey deserved to be fired for publically re-opening the investigation to the Hillary Clinton emails days before the election, an investigation that should have been kept private through-out, just like the investigation of Russian links to the Trump campaign by the FBI was kept private.  However Trump didn't fire Comey for the email investigation, he fired Comey for the Russian investigation and told a reporter and Russian diplomats that was the reason.

 

I don't know what Rosenstein told Trump about the dossier. Do you have links showing what that was? 

 

The "infamous dossier" was put together by a respected former British spy, Christopher Steele, who's past work was deemed of sufficient quality to be used by the FBI.   Steele was opposed to Trump becoming President because he thought Russia had compromising information on Trump. Since all we know about the FISA court application is from a biased four page memo that presented selected facts (none of them convincing), I don't know how much influence the dossier had on the judge's decision to grant a warrant. 

 

Since Page had been of interest to the FBI since it learned Page had been in contact with Russian Intelligence operatives in 2013, and since two the warrants for surveillance of Page had been granted by previous FISA courts, and since the only dossier information used in the latest FISA court application had been independently verified, it's unlikely the court would have refused the warrant application if the same information had been presented with a different presentation of the background information on the dossier.

 

Where did I say Trump is stopping the investigation of Russian internet trolls?  I said Trump is not taking any action to sanction Russia for past and present attempts meddling in our election.  Do you dispute that?

[Khun Han]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

How is the investigation personally targeting Trump?  The investigation is into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.  Since two of the five foreign advisers in the Trump campaign, Carter Page and George Papadopoulis, were "persons of interest" to the FBI because of their Russia connections, possible collusion was a very reasonable fear.

 

I agree Comey deserved to be fired for publically re-opening the investigation to the Hillary Clinton emails days before the election, an investigation that should have been kept private through-out, just like the investigation of Russian links to the Trump campaign by the FBI was kept private.  However Trump didn't fire Comey for the email investigation, he fired Comey for the Russian investigation and told a reporter and Russian diplomats that was the reason.

 

I don't know what Rosenstein told Trump about the dossier. Do you have links showing what that was? 

 

The "infamous dossier" was put together by a respected former British spy, Christopher Steele, who's past work was deemed of sufficient quality to be used by the FBI.   Steele was opposed to Trump becoming President because he thought Russia had compromising information on Trump. Since all we know about the FISA court application is from a biased four page memo that presented selected facts (none of them convincing), I don't know how much influence the dossier had on the judge's decision to grant a warrant. 

 

Since Page had been of interest to the FBI since it learned Page had been in contact with Russian Intelligence operatives in 2013, and since two the warrants for surveillance of Page had been granted by previous FISA courts, and since the only dossier information used in the latest FISA court application had been independently verified, it's unlikely the court would have refused the warrant application if the same information had been presented with a different presentation of the background information on the dossier.

 

Where did I say Trump is stopping the investigation of Russian internet trolls?  I said Trump is not taking any action to sanction Russia for past and present attempts meddling in our election.  Do you dispute that?

 

"How is the investigation personally targeting Trump?"

 

Is that a joke?

 

 

"I agree Comey deserved to be fired for publically re-opening the investigation to the Hillary Clinton emails days before the election, an investigation that should have been kept private through-out, just like the investigation of Russian links to the Trump campaign by the FBI was kept private.  However Trump didn't fire Comey for the email investigation, he fired Comey for the Russian investigation and told a reporter and Russian diplomats that was the reason."

 

Oh, how witty to deliberately misinterpret my post. Comey allowed his own assessment on HRC's private server behaviour to be watered down from criminality to 'a bit careless'. And Trump fired Comey because he told Trump that the Steele dossier was unsubstantiated, whilst his minions were telling FISA that it was substantiated. That's called lying to the President, however you want to dress it up.

 

"I don't know what Rosenstein told Trump about the dossier. Do you have links showing what that was? "

 

That was Comey (as explained above). It's well-documented, as I'm sure you know. Rosenstein was complicit.

 

"Since Page had been of interest to the FBI since it learned Page had been in contact with Russian Intelligence operatives in 2013, and since two the warrants for surveillance of Page had been granted by previous FISA courts, and since the only dossier information used in the latest FISA court application had been independently verified, it's unlikely the court would have refused the warrant application if the same information had been presented with a different presentation of the background information on the dossier."

 

Page reported himself after being approached by Russian intelligence. Can you confirm with reliable evidence that the dossier evidence presented to FISA had been independently verified? It appears that the 'independent' verification presented to FISA was a Yahoo News article leaked by Steele himself.

 

"Where did I say Trump is stopping the investigation of Russian internet trolls?  I said Trump is not taking any action to sanction Russia for past and present attempts meddling in our election.  Do you dispute that?"

 

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

Trump doesn't have to stop the security services from acting on their information; the only response to clear evidence of Russian meddling is political, the FBI can't go into Russia and arrest people.  It certainly appears that Trump wants to end the investigation and take no action against Russia.

 

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

The President will not take action against something that he denies happened, so, as much as Trump can arrange, Russia has license to interfere again.

 

Edited February 14, 2018 by Khun Han

[selftaopath]

17 hours ago, heybruce said:

So, instead of finding and shutting down the source of countless cockroaches, you think it's better to chase after each cockroach?

And the biggest/fattest/ most dangerous cockroach lives in the WH. Here's a candid realization most American - I bet - don't realize or want to acknowledge.

 

[Morch]

9 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

But we're not talking about loons or conspiracy theorists, are we? We're tolking about state-organised propaganda, which has allegedly influenced the results of democratic votes.

 

The effort is state-organized, the ways in which it manifests itself and being propagated can be otherwise. Rather obvious to anyone following this forum, for example.

[Khun Han]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The effort is state-organized, the ways in which it manifests itself and being propagated can be otherwise. Rather obvious to anyone following this forum, for example.

 

Yes, people being led by their noses by propaganda in public media is a massive problem. And never more evident than when seen in the Pavlov's dog-type behaviour by many in these discussions.

[boomerangutang]

                The reason cyber attacks are so successful, in the US, is because right-wingers are so easily duped.  The same people who believed, for 5 long years, that Obama was a Kenyan Muslim and the same folks who believe every bit of BS the Russkies (and right wing dirty tricksters like Ailes and Roger Stone) tell them to believe.

 

The reason the US is going downhill is only partly due to Trump's screw-ups.  Just as responsible are the millions of dough-headed, overweight, pharma-pill-popping, gun-hugging right wingers who enable Trump and his cabal to denigrate the US.

 

The most successful con men are those whose victims don't even know they're being conned.  

 

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Yes, people being led by their noses by propaganda in public media is a massive problem. And never more evident than when seen in the Pavlov's dog-type behaviour by many in these discussions.

 

 

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                The reason cyber attacks are so successful, in the US, is because right-wingers are so easily duped.  The same people who believed, for 5 long years, that Obama was a Kenyan Muslim and the same folks who believe every bit of BS the Russkies (and right wing dirty tricksters like Ailes and Roger Stone) tell them to believe.

 

The reason the US is going downhill is only partly due to Trump's screw-ups.  Just as responsible are the millions of dough-headed, overweight, pharma-pill-popping, gun-hugging right wingers who enable Trump and his cabal to denigrate the US.

 

The most successful con men are those whose victims don't even know they're being conned.  

 

Wouldn't you say that the people you describe were already in the Trump camp?

[selftaopath]

18 hours ago, heybruce said:

Not cheap or simple; trolls can breed cockroaches faster than cockroaches can be caught.  Shutting down the trolls is a better option, even if it is a temporary fix.  Regardless, it would require the cooperation of the social media companies.  The big ones are reluctant to assist, and the small ones refuse.

 

The simple solution is for people to exercise a degree of rational skepticism and look into sources and motives for the "OMG" things they see on the internet.  Unfortunately many people love their OMG moments and don't ask questions when they find a good one.

With the current WH occupant Putin has nothing to worry about. However I believe a list of Russia's billionaires was set to be publicized but if I'm not mistaken "you know who" squashed it b/c Putin was very fearful of this. If we has someone who embraced the U.S. Constitution we could possibly throw crap back at Russia/Putin. But under this guy Russian spies "not allowed into America" were allowed and discussed - of all thing- cyber security with our very own CIA.

 

I could very well have a fact wrong and please feel free to correct me. I'm relying on my memory which is many times unreliable. lol 

[boomerangutang]

3 hours ago, selftaopath said:

With the current WH occupant Putin has nothing to worry about. However I believe a list of Russia's billionaires was set to be publicized but if I'm not mistaken "you know who" squashed it b/c Putin was very fearful of this. If we has someone who embraced the U.S. Constitution we could possibly throw crap back at Russia/Putin. But under this guy Russian spies "not allowed into America" were allowed and discussed - of all thing- cyber security with our very own CIA. I could very well have a fact wrong and please feel free to correct me. I'm relying on my memory which is many times unreliable. lol 

You're not wrong.  Here's Rachel connecting dots that right wingers are afraid to look at or acknowledge. . . 

 

 

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

"How is the investigation personally targeting Trump?"

 

Is that a joke?

 

 

"I agree Comey deserved to be fired for publically re-opening the investigation to the Hillary Clinton emails days before the election, an investigation that should have been kept private through-out, just like the investigation of Russian links to the Trump campaign by the FBI was kept private.  However Trump didn't fire Comey for the email investigation, he fired Comey for the Russian investigation and told a reporter and Russian diplomats that was the reason."

 

Oh, how witty to deliberately misinterpret my post. Comey allowed his own assessment on HRC's private server behaviour to be watered down from criminality to 'a bit careless'. And Trump fired Comey because he told Trump that the Steele dossier was unsubstantiated, whilst his minions were telling FISA that it was substantiated. That's called lying to the President, however you want to dress it up.

 

"I don't know what Rosenstein told Trump about the dossier. Do you have links showing what that was? "

 

That was Comey (as explained above). It's well-documented, as I'm sure you know. Rosenstein was complicit.

 

"Since Page had been of interest to the FBI since it learned Page had been in contact with Russian Intelligence operatives in 2013, and since two the warrants for surveillance of Page had been granted by previous FISA courts, and since the only dossier information used in the latest FISA court application had been independently verified, it's unlikely the court would have refused the warrant application if the same information had been presented with a different presentation of the background information on the dossier."

 

Page reported himself after being approached by Russian intelligence. Can you confirm with reliable evidence that the dossier evidence presented to FISA had been independently verified? It appears that the 'independent' verification presented to FISA was a Yahoo News article leaked by Steele himself.

 

"Where did I say Trump is stopping the investigation of Russian internet trolls?  I said Trump is not taking any action to sanction Russia for past and present attempts meddling in our election.  Do you dispute that?"

""How is the investigation personally targeting Trump?"

 

Is that a joke?"

 

No.  Investigations of illegal activity are not personal.  Also, the Trump campaign is being targeted, Trump will only be targeted if evidence is found that he personally colluded or attempted to cover up collusion by others.  Though there is a good chance of that happening.

 

"Oh, how witty to deliberately misinterpret my post."

 

Oh, how witty of you to deliberately misinterpret my post, and reality.  You think Comey deserved to be fired because he didn't charge Clinton, I think Comey deserved to be fired because he threw the election to Trump.  However Trump didn't fire Comey for either of these reasons, he fired Comey because he was investigating Russian interference in the election.

 

"And Trump fired Comey because he told Trump that the Steele dossier was unsubstantiated, whilst his minions were telling FISA that it was substantiated."

 

Why not substantiate your claim with sources saying exactly what was said and when?  Parts of the dossier have not been substantiated, parts have, and none has been definitively disproven.  The parts used in the FISA court application were substantiated.

 

"That was Comey (as explained above). It's well-documented, as I'm sure you know. Rosenstein was complicit."

 

If this is well documented you should have no problem coming up with sources to clarify and support your claims.

 

" It appears that the 'independent' verification presented to FISA was a Yahoo News article leaked by Steele himself."

 

Do you have sources for that?

 

Thank you for repeating my posts that state that Trump is doing nothing to punish Russia for past interference in US elections and prevent Russia for interfering in future elections.  However these do not support your claim that I accused Trump of preventing investigations of Russian trolls.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Yes, people being led by their noses by propaganda in public media is a massive problem. And never more evident than when seen in the Pavlov's dog-type behaviour by many in these discussions.

And there is no more wide-spread propaganda media than the news sources controlled by Rupert Murdoch, including Fox News.  Murdoch has been using his news outlets to mislead voters, favor or denigrate politicians, and influence politics since he first began his media empire in Australia.

Edited February 15, 2018 by heybruce

[thaibeachlovers]

20 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

I think your solution of having an army of operatives trying to shut down troll operations is just flogging a dead horse.

There is already an army of operatives in the US "security" services that were apparently incapable of stopping an attack during the 2016 election, why would even more be able to do anything different?

Pandora's box has been opened and it isn't getting closed again now matter how many geeks they employ to spy on all our messages.

Education would be a good start.

My solution is not to read anything on the internet except what I look for myself. Way too much click bait on all the big companies web sites.

[thaibeachlovers]

34 minutes ago, heybruce said:

And there is no more wide-spread propaganda media than the news sources controlled by Rupert Murdoch, including Fox News.  Murdoch has been using his news outlets to mislead voters, favor or denigrate politicians, and influence politics since he first began his media empire in Australia.

Fox News, yes, and also Sky news which is as anti Trump as any tv "news" channel I've seen.

BTW a few presenters on Fox that really dislike Trump, so not one sided.

[heybruce]

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Fox News, yes, and also Sky news which is as anti Trump as any tv "news" channel I've seen.

BTW a few presenters on Fox that really dislike Trump, so not one sided.

Murdoch does not yet own controlling interest in Sky TV.  He is trying to acquire it, and is trying to convince UK regulators that Sky News will remain independent and not be influenced by Murdoch's political views.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sky-plc-m-a-fox/murdoch-pledges-independent-sky-news-to-smooth-path-for-fox-deal-idUSKBN1FW16M

 

What presenters on Fox are consistently objective in reporting on Trump?  I know Fox has a few objective news programs, but Fox's big draws are its foam-at-the-mouth pundits.  It's difficult to find the low rated objective programs on Fox.

Edited February 15, 2018 by heybruce

[Khun Han]

16 hours ago, heybruce said:

""How is the investigation personally targeting Trump?"

 

Is that a joke?"

 

No.  Investigations of illegal activity are not personal.  Also, the Trump campaign is being targeted, Trump will only be targeted if evidence is found that he personally colluded or attempted to cover up collusion by others.  Though there is a good chance of that happening.

 

"Oh, how witty to deliberately misinterpret my post."

 

Oh, how witty of you to deliberately misinterpret my post, and reality.  You think Comey deserved to be fired because he didn't charge Clinton, I think Comey deserved to be fired because he threw the election to Trump.  However Trump didn't fire Comey for either of these reasons, he fired Comey because he was investigating Russian interference in the election.

 

"And Trump fired Comey because he told Trump that the Steele dossier was unsubstantiated, whilst his minions were telling FISA that it was substantiated."

 

Why not substantiate your claim with sources saying exactly what was said and when?  Parts of the dossier have not been substantiated, parts have, and none has been definitively disproven.  The parts used in the FISA court application were substantiated.

 

"That was Comey (as explained above). It's well-documented, as I'm sure you know. Rosenstein was complicit."

 

If this is well documented you should have no problem coming up with sources to clarify and support your claims.

 

" It appears that the 'independent' verification presented to FISA was a Yahoo News article leaked by Steele himself."

 

Do you have sources for that?

 

Thank you for repeating my posts that state that Trump is doing nothing to punish Russia for past interference in US elections and prevent Russia for interfering in future elections.  However these do not support your claim that I accused Trump of preventing investigations of Russian trolls.

 

Sorry, but you're sending this debate around in circles by denying evidence already in the public domain and publicised widely, and even denying your own statements on this thread. Come back to me when you have something new and interesting. bfn.

[Khun Han]

15 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Fox News, yes, and also Sky news which is as anti Trump as any tv "news" channel I've seen.

BTW a few presenters on Fox that really dislike Trump, so not one sided.

 

You're wasting your time. It's like debating with religious fundamentalists.