The truth about blaming Russia
- Thread starter MegaPoke
- Start date
1. No. I would not put it beyond Wikileaks to lie to protect a source. Even if I believed them, acting on that belief by not doing an investigation leaves our national security inquiries to the whims of their statements. Even if you trusted the veracity of Wikileaks statement, an old adage comes to mind..."Trust....but verify."
2. No....taking all your stated variables into account. The timing is certainly suspect to me. Also suspect to me, is the question of whether Trump will ever fully and fairly investigate it. It's certainly a dilemma. Maybe the answer is congressional inquiries after inauguration.
3. I havent heard such rumors....except as statements of fact from some here. How would I feel? Hard to predict emotional future. What would I think? I would think that it still needed to be investigated because if it was a US Intelligence entity hacking and leaking, that is as concerning or more concerning to national security than Russia doing the hacking. (Edit: read your subsequent posts and links. Certainly not something you can just dismiss out of hand. Sounds like a good, thorough investigation is necessary).
I'm just saying all the "Get over it, we won" posts essentially denying we need an investigation are eerily reminiscent of Hillary screeching "what does it matter now anyway" during Benghazi hearings.
Last edited:
JD I agree the actual leaks need to be investigated and also agree that if it is someone in the intelligence community that is a huge problem. This person is open to all kinds of blackmail threats and not to mention losing their job and going to jail.
When I say "elections have consequences" and I'm assuming many if not all here feel the same way, I'm simply saying quit whining about the PV vs EC, quit whining about leaving the country etc etc. I definitely want an investigation, but am skeptical if people like McCain or Graham (or anyone on the left) wouldn't put their fingers on the scales with regards to what the public would or wouldn't know. The establishment on both sides of the isle have lots of interests to protect and they see Trump as an existential threat to good ole days. Will they be open and honest or influence the investigation to fit their world view? Guess someone needs to convince me they actually want what's best for American and not what best for their re-election efforts and their legacy.
When I say "elections have consequences" and I'm assuming many if not all here feel the same way, I'm simply saying quit whining about the PV vs EC, quit whining about leaving the country etc etc. I definitely want an investigation, but am skeptical if people like McCain or Graham (or anyone on the left) wouldn't put their fingers on the scales with regards to what the public would or wouldn't know. The establishment on both sides of the isle have lots of interests to protect and they see Trump as an existential threat to good ole days. Will they be open and honest or influence the investigation to fit their world view? Guess someone needs to convince me they actually want what's best for American and not what best for their re-election efforts and their legacy.
I want an investigation but only if it results in getting the facts and then using what they find to correct what has obviously been neglected for a long time---securing our networks to prevent or make it very difficult to penetrate them by anyone. The anyone can be a state actor or the rogue dweebs sitting in their basements.
DHS Chief ain't buying: https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/1...acking-by-any-actor-altered-the-ballot-count/
I agree. It's unfortunate that ANY investigation on ANY issue is bound to be dismissed as politically motivated by approximately half our elected officials going forward into the future...no matter what the findings end up being.
I have many of the same concerns.
As someone who works in law enforcement and somewhat in the Homeland Security arena, I'm really, seriously concerned that no one seems to trust law enforcement officials to perform an unbiased investigation not motivated by political leanings. Have they/we brought part of that distrust down on ourselves? Absolutely.....particularly at the national level.
It's quite the conundrum to deal with.
If there are 17 spy agencies then the CIA is just the marketing wing with name recognition. The real work goes on somewhere else.
Yep. CIA no longer does what it originally was intended to do...human intel.
They have fighters all over the world and drones that answer to The state department.
So I have a little different tack on this subject. The DNC is a private entity. Just like the private company I work for. It is difficult for me to wrap my mind around a congressional investigation into my company's business. I'm not convinced that is the federal government's purview.
If they want to do an investigation on Hillary's server, fine. That's their baby. If they want to investigate the foreign publication of the data, fine. But if there was an allegation of vote tampering in a state, then that would be the purview of the state. And if the DNC want's to know if/how they were breached then that would be on them as a private entity.
If they want to do an investigation on Hillary's server, fine. That's their baby. If they want to investigate the foreign publication of the data, fine. But if there was an allegation of vote tampering in a state, then that would be the purview of the state. And if the DNC want's to know if/how they were breached then that would be on them as a private entity.
Okay. I get what you are saying now.
Yes, basically they are NOW another branch of the military....but shouldn't be.
That's not what their original mission or purpose was. They have strayed immensely from what they should be doing.
We will just disagree then.
If they want to do an investigation on criminal conduct directed towards your company, the DNC, or state election boards using the nation's communication infrastructure, that is well within the federal government's purview IMO.
So, a criminal investigation is different than what is being proposed. A congressional oversight committee don't fit that bill. An intelligence briefing to the EC doesn't fit that bill.
True, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to tell the electors about the hacks at your company.
I didn't say a"criminal investigation". I said an "investigation on criminal conduct" using national infrastructure. Those aren't the same thing.
Like I said, we're just going to disagree....and that's perfectly okay.
I see where you are going with this. So let me expand the question a bit then. What protections does my company have that might safeguard us regarding the release of any findings? This seems like a broad power that could be used as a hammer against companies. It could also reveal to others just where we are vulnerable for further breach attempts. I don't like this at all.
You have the power to decline a request to appear or to provide documents and if Congress pushes the issue to the point of attempting to compel testimony and production, you have the power of filing a Motion to Quash any subpoena to testify or to provide any records before a magistrate of the Judicial branch.
Checks and balances.
Similar threads
