Trump aides ask of Russian meddling: Does it matter?

[webfact]

Trump aides ask of Russian meddling: Does it matter?

By ANNE FLAHERTY

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump's top aides on Sunday said the president-elect isn't ready to accept the finding by intelligence officials that Moscow hacked Democratic emails in a bid to elevate Trump. Even if it's true, they said, Trump still won the White House fair and square.

 

The pushback came a day before members of the Electoral College are scheduled to formally cast votes for Trump as the 45th president. While Democrats likely are powerless to stop it, they suggested Trump's victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton would forever be tainted by Russian meddling.

 

"This whole thing is a spin job," said Trump's incoming chief of staff, Reince Priebus. "And I think what the Democrats ought to do is look in the mirror and face the reality that they lost the election."

 

Trump himself weighed in Sunday evening, tweeting, "If my many supporters acted and threatened people like those who lost the election are doing, they would be scorned & called terrible names!"

 

The partisan swipes mostly ignored warnings by foreign policy experts that part of Russia's calculation also was likely payback for years of U.S. criticism of its own elections and a desire to portray America as a flawed champion of democracy — potentially weakening U.S. power on the world stage. Russia has vehemently denied the accusation.

 

Many lawmakers, including some leading Republicans, say voters may not have been swayed by the release of tens of thousands of private emails. But the fact that a foreign power tried to intervene in U.S. democracy and exploit divisions in American politics is cause for alarm, they say.

 

Still, Trump's transition team and loyalists on Capitol Hill weren't buying it, at least not on the eve of the Electoral College vote.

"Where's the evidence?" asked Kellyanne Conway, another close Trump adviser.

 

Asked about President Barack Obama's vow to retaliate against the Russians, Conway said: "It seems like the president is under pressure from Team Hillary, who can't accept the election results."

 

Democrats say it's unlikely the public will ever hear detailed evidence because doing so would disclose classified sources and methods. But with last week's declaration by CIA Director John Brennan that there was "strong consensus" that Russia hacked Democrats to try to sway the election, lawmakers are stepping up demands for closed-door briefings and a separate congressional investigation.

 

California Rep. Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said an unclassified intelligence review could be released within the next two weeks or three weeks.

 

As president-elect, Trump would have access to high-level intelligence on the matter, although it's unclear what he's been told. Trump has previously called the intelligence finding of Russian involvement "ridiculous." On Sunday, Conway said she wasn't privy to the same intelligence briefings as the president-elect and couldn't say what he knows.

 

Donna Brazile, interim head of the Democratic National Committee, said the DNC was no match for a sophisticated foreign power in cyberspace that "weaponized" private emails to "sow misinformation and to sow discord" between Clinton and her primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

 

Also on Sunday:

 

—Brazile said the cyberattacks against the DNC occurred every day through the end of the election. The comment seemed to contradict Obama assertion that they stopped after he warned Russian President Vladimir Putin in September.

 

—Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and John McCain, R-Ariz., called for creation of a special Senate investigative committee focused on Russia, China and Iran potentially trying to interfere in U.S. elections through high-tech meddling.

 

—Priebus said he was "100 percent confident" that the Senate would confirm Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson as Trump's secretary of state. The oil company oil executive has deep ties to Russia and no government experience.

 

—Priebus said the naming of lawyer David Friedman as Trump's ambassador to Israel doesn't mean that Trump rejects the notion of a two-state solution in the Middle East. Friedman has suggested Trump would support Israeli annexation of parts of the West Bank, effectively eliminating the possibility of a Palestinian state.

 

"There's going to be things that individually people may believe in their hearts or in their mind," Priebus said of Trump's nominees to top posts. "But ultimately, it's their job to represent the president-elect of the United States and his foreign policy."

 

Priebus appeared on "Fox News Sunday," Conway was interviewed on CBS' "Face the Nation" and Brazile and Schiff were on ABC's "This Week."

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-12-19

[craigt3365]

No wonder the intelligence community doesn't want to brief Trump's team on this.  This is terrible.

[jaidam]

Who to believe? Assange and Wikileaks, who with no political axe to grind, other than their interest in propagating the truth,  claim the Russians had nothing to do with the release of emails and other documents, or the butthurt DNC and their msm lapdogs, who are spitting the dummy after their preferred candidate crashed and burnt? Difficult one.

 

I would like to see Trump cozy up to the Russians more. Not just to rub the lefts nose in it, after the dems left the 2 superpowers on the brink of nuclear armageddon, but also for the sake of easy trade and world peace.

[jaidam]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

Assange is hardly a credible source.  He's had an axe to grind with the West since he was young.  Extremely biased.  Wikileaks publishing private details on women in Turkey was the last straw for me.  An absolutely terrible thing to do.  No conscience and it had nothing to do with propagating the truth.  Nor does mass releases of unverified data.

 

It's been proven Russia did the hacking.  No denying it.  As for Trump, he's been cozying up to Russia for a long, long time.  Lots of vested interests. 

Are you suggesting that Assange/wikileaks are fabricating documents with the purpose of discrediting the democrat party? Otherwise the inference is that the public do not have the right to know all the dirty shennanigans HRC and cohorts got up to, and should have voted with only the information that the msm wanted the electorate to have(unbelievably biased tosh)

[craigt3365]

6 minutes ago, jaidam said:

Are you suggesting that Assange/wikileaks are fabricating documents with the purpose of discrediting the democrat party? Otherwise the inference is that the public do not have the right to know all the dirty shennanigans HRC and cohorts got up to, and should have voted with only the information that the msm wanted the electorate to have(unbelievably biased tosh)

No, not saying that.  Just saying it's un-vetted info.  How do you know 100% it's all true?  And how can you 100% dismiss the findings of the 17 intelligence organizations and the numerous private ones who've verified what's happened?

 

The public has NO right to read a private organizations emails.  Just like they have no right to your private data.  What's fair is fair.  And this was an illegal hack.

[atyclb]

10 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Assange is hardly a credible source.  He's had an axe to grind with the West since he was young.  Extremely biased.  Wikileaks publishing private details on women in Turkey was the last straw for me.  An absolutely terrible thing to do.  No conscience and it had nothing to do with propagating the truth.  Nor does mass releases of unverified data.

 

It's been proven Russia did the hacking.  No denying it.  As for Trump, he's been cozying up to Russia for a long, long time.  Lots of vested interests. 

 

computer-IT experts have already confirmed the validity of wikileaks emails so that is not even a question except for those that have been exposed trying to deflect. it could have been republican or trump emails as well.

[atyclb]

3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

No, not saying that.  Just saying it's un-vetted info.  How do you know 100% it's all true?  And how can you 100% dismiss the findings of the 17 intelligence organizations and the numerous private ones who've verified what's happened?

 

The public has NO right to read a private organizations emails.  Just like they have no right to your private data.  What's fair is fair.  And this was an illegal hack.

 

 

just like the public had no right to know about "the watergate papers"

 

government  officials are public figures and the public pays their salaries.

 

are you saying the people paying taxes and their salaries shouldnt know if there is corruption and criminal activity being committed? 

[craigt3365]

12 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

just like the public had no right to know about "the watergate papers"

 

government  officials are public figures and the public pays their salaries.

 

are you saying the people paying taxes and their salaries shouldnt know if there is corruption and criminal activity being committed? 

The DNC is a private organization.  Not a government organization.  Even if they were, it's not right to have this made public.  Some info is public, some is not.  No different than any other government in the world, right?  It's also illegal.  If you want all info to be made public, then lobby your congressmen. 

[IAMHERE]

" "This whole thing is a spin job," said Trump's incoming chief of staff, Reince Priebus. "And I think what the Democrats ought to do is look in the mirror and face the reality that they lost the election." "

I for one sure hope the democrats do not do this, hope they learn nothing and lose in 2020 too.

 

For what its worth, how many foreign elections has the USA tried to influence? Hardly have a high horse to be pointing fingers from on this topic.

[atyclb]

9 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

The DNC is a private organization.  Not a government organization.  Even if they were, it's not right to have this made public.  Some info is public, some is not.  No different than any other government in the world, right?  It's also illegal.  If you want all info to be made public, then lobby your congressmen. 

 

you are right,  politicians, private organizations, and their sponsors   corrupt and or criminal activities should not be exposed.

[kamahele]

1 hour ago, jaidam said:

Who to believe? Assange and Wikileaks, who with no political axe to grind, other than their interest in propagating the truth,  claim the Russians had nothing to do with the release of emails and other documents, or the butthurt DNC and their msm lapdogs, who are spitting the dummy after their preferred candidate crashed and burnt? Difficult one.

 

I would like to see Trump cozy up to the Russians more. Not just to rub the lefts nose in it, after the dems left the 2 superpowers on the brink of nuclear armageddon, but also for the sake of easy trade and world peace.

Actually Assange has admitted quite openly he has an axe to grind against the US and against Clinton so you're wrong there. How have the democrats left 2 superpowers on the brink of nuclear Armageddon? Did the Democrats invade the Ukraine? Did the US provide support to Assad in Syria? Did the Democrats have their political opponants and journalists not touting the party line killed as Putin has? Could you please provide more details comrade?

[craigt3365]

13 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

you are right,  politicians, private organizations, and their sponsors   corrupt and or criminal activities should not be exposed.

I didn't say that.  But it's has to be done legally.  Wikileaks, as much as some like it, is not legal.  There are other ways to do this.  Please, take the time to read this article.  It has some good points to it.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/opinion/what-were-missing-while-we-obsess-over-john-podestas-email.html

 

Quote

 

WikiLeaks Isn’t Whistleblowing

Whistle-blowing, as Mr. Ellsberg did, is a time-honored means for exposing the secret machinations of the powerful. But the release of huge amounts of hacked data, with no apparent oversight or curation, does the opposite. Such leaks threaten our ability to dissent by destroying privacy and unleashing a glut of questionable information that functions, somewhat unexpectedly, as its own form of censorship, rather than as a way to illuminate the maneuverings of the powerful.

 

 

[craigt3365]

20 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

" "This whole thing is a spin job," said Trump's incoming chief of staff, Reince Priebus. "And I think what the Democrats ought to do is look in the mirror and face the reality that they lost the election." "

I for one sure hope the democrats do not do this, hope they learn nothing and lose in 2020 too.

 

For what its worth, how many foreign elections has the USA tried to influence? Hardly have a high horse to be pointing fingers from on this topic.

Priebus has a huge vested interest here.  And has been proven to be less than credible.  Talk about spin jobs...LOL

[Stargeezr]

Republicans  and Democrats  who are  from  the  old  school,  just  do  not  like Trump.  The  next  4 years  will be  interesting.  I  just  hope that  the  temperatures on Earth  will not  go  over 50 to 60c,  as  seeing  it  go to 3000c  anywhere  will

be  bad  for  all  of  us.

Geezer

[honoluludave]

With D.Trumps ego he is never going to accept the fact that he did not win this election on his own. And had outside help to influence voters. 

[Andaman Al]

50 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

just like the public had no right to know about "the watergate papers"

 

government  officials are public figures and the public pays their salaries.

 

are you saying the people paying taxes and their salaries shouldnt know if there is corruption and criminal activity being committed? 

My what a change of heart you have all had from when you wanted Assange strung up by the kahoona's for revealing the criminal activities of the public employed military'. And still Manning languishes in jail and yet all the time you really thought that it is correct to reveal the Truth.

 

Assange is aware that he and wikileaks have now lost all credibility they had. I hope he likes Ecuadorian embassy food.

 

1 hour ago, jaidam said:

after the dems left the 2 superpowers on the brink of nuclear armageddon,

One of the most unintelligent comments on TV for a while.

[bark]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

No wonder the intelligence community doesn't want to brief Trump's team on this.  This is terrible.

You must be a Hilary supporter. Please wipe up the spelt milk, after you are finished crying.

[bark]

9 minutes ago, honoluludave said:

With D.Trumps ego he is never going to accept the fact that he did not win this election on his own. And had outside help to influence voters. 

He did win that way.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, bark said:

You must be a Hilary supporter. Please wipe up the spelt milk, after you are finished crying.

Not at all, quite the opposite.  How about abiding by forum rules and showing respect to other members?

[bark]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Not at all, quite the opposite.  How about abiding by forum rules and showing respect to other members?

I respect all members of Thai Visa. Always have.

Do I need to agree with you ? On every topic ?

Sorry if you feel that way, I will not answer any of your points.

Merry Christmas.

[atyclb]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

I didn't say that.  But it's has to be done legally.  Wikileaks, as much as some like it, is not legal.  There are other ways to do this.  Please, take the time to read this article.  It has some good points to it.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/opinion/what-were-missing-while-we-obsess-over-john-podestas-email.html

 

 

i  read the nyt article.  the emails are in the court of public opinion, not in a USA court of law where there are rules about evidence.  btw whats your opinion on snowden revealing governments collecting mass data which they can use against people sometime in the future and pseudo courts aka fisa courts (not sure if spelled right)  the us government is already crippling the constitution and bill of rights but some people feel its important to protect criminal activities of politicians and those working for/with them.

 

it would be nice to say the controlling interest of nyt is not a donor to the democratic party/obama and just might be biased and of course news media outlets are not biased or political 

[lannarebirth]

 

The insinuation that was intended all along but has taken too long to present, much less prove:

 

Quote

 

Podesta Says Trump Campaign May Have Colluded With Russians

https://www.yahoo.com/news/podesta-says-trump-campaign-may-185655181.html

 

 

Edited December 19, 2016 by lannarebirth

[Pimay1]

17 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

The insinuation that was intended all along but has taken too long to present, much less prove:

 

 

Podesta is a sore loser just like Michelle. The insinuation is just what it is, an insinuation.

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

To say Assange has not biased here is ridiculous. Die we see any similar emails released from the Reps? No!! You can't tell me those guys don't have some major skeletons in their closets.

[smotherb]

3 hours ago, jaidam said:

Who to believe? Assange and Wikileaks, who with no political axe to grind, other than their interest in propagating the truth,  claim the Russians had nothing to do with the release of emails and other documents, or the butthurt DNC and their msm lapdogs, who are spitting the dummy after their preferred candidate crashed and burnt? Difficult one.

 

I would like to see Trump cozy up to the Russians more. Not just to rub the lefts nose in it, after the dems left the 2 superpowers on the brink of nuclear armageddon, but also for the sake of easy trade and world peace.

So, now the DNC controls the intelligence. If Trump won fairly; then there should be no problem with investigating any election issue to prove it to those nasty-ass liberals and make them shut their faces

[smotherb]

3 hours ago, jaidam said:

Are you suggesting that Assange/wikileaks are fabricating documents with the purpose of discrediting the democrat party? Otherwise the inference is that the public do not have the right to know all the dirty shennanigans HRC and cohorts got up to, and should have voted with only the information that the msm wanted the electorate to have(unbelievably biased tosh)

Gee, I would think that depends upon whether the RNC or DNC is paying Assange/wikileaks. Do you think they do this for free?  Even McCain--you know, that coward who let himself get captured-- has come out to say their was Russian involvement.

 

Please. give me one good US patriotic reason why ensuring our election system was 1) free from rigging and 2) that Russia was not involved in it; is in any way detrimental to the interests of the US?

[Jingthing]

Putin is a vicious, evil, and aggressive enemy of democracy.

trump is now his poodle. Americans should be disgusted. 

Now the U.S. electors are about to elevate the first American president dictator.

 

God help us. 

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/18/politics/john-mccain-russia-hacking/index.html

Quote

 

Washington (CNN)Sen. John McCain said Russian election-related hacks threaten to "destroy democracy" and faulted the American response as "totally paralyzed."

McCain, the Arizona Republican who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, again called for a select committee to investigate the CIA's finding that Russia hacked Democrats' emails in a bid to help President-elect Donald Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.

"This is the sign of a possible unraveling of the world order that was established after World War II, which has made one of the most peaceful periods in the history of the world," McCain told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union." 

 

 

Edited December 20, 2016 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[CharlieK]

Is Obama trying to protect his legacy? He is singularly responsible for the weakening of American power on the world stage. But hey lets blame it on the Russians, Not my fault!

 

 

[sukk741]

D.Trumps with his ego never going to accept the fact that he will not win this election on his own. And with the assistance of external influences voters.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, sukk741 said:

D.Trumps with his ego never going to accept the fact that he will not win this election on his own. And with the assistance of external influences voters.

It isn't so much that he won. He won.

It's that a U.S. president puts more trust in a Russian dictator than the unanimous consensus of his own intelligence agences. He ran on America first. More like Putin first for that traitorous clown. 

 

It will be interesting to see how he can avoid an impeachment attempt and also how he deals with it, considering his obvious dictatorial temperament. 

Edited December 19, 2016 by Jingthing