Russian election hack: Obama calls for retaliation

First topic message reminder :

President Barack Obama on Thursday called for retaliation against Russia for the hacking of Democratic National Committee emails that federal authorities believe was meant to sway the presidential election in President-elect Donald Trump’s favor.

“I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections ... we need to take action,” Obama said in an interview with NPR, to be broadcast Friday. “And we will, at a time and place of our own choosing. Some of it may be explicit and publicized; some of it may not be.”

Obama last met with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in September to discuss the cyberattacks.

“He is well aware of my feelings, because I spoke to him directly about it,” he said.

U.S. intelligence officials believe that Putin may have directly ordered the hack, according to NBC. On Thursday, NBC reported that government sources said that the Obama administration decided against responding to Russia before the election for fear of a cyber-war. The White House also did not want to appear to be intervening in the election and believed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would win.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-russian-hacking_us_58535002e4b08debb7885ab6

scrat wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

"Crooked Hillary" -- why have you decided to talk like President-elect Orange Hitler? And what proof do you have that she's "crooked"?

Sorry, all due respect, but you're not coming off as very well informed about this issue. It sounds as though you have not looked at the issue objectively.

With all due respect you're also trying to defend the indefensible, crooked Hilary tried her best to cover up her criminality, the emails, surely you must ask yourself what we're the contents that caused her to lie to the FBI, the Clinton foundation smothered in corruption from arms deals and just about every other deal all stained with blood money, the cheating and manipulation of Bernie Sanders, the derogatory dismissal of his supporters, the defence of rapists and the denial and obfuscation at every turn, all displayed for public view and you just know that more will crawl out of the woodwork if an investigation were to ever take place.

She's as bent as a nine bob note, and the fact that your electorate voted for a bigoted idiot like Trump in place of her, shows the depth of contempt your electorate hold her in.

Trump could turn out to be a nightmare, but IMO Clinton was seen as someone who hid in the shadows, far too Machiavellian for a modern democracy with enough nukes to destroy the planet, over and over again.

You forgot to explain how she's behind Hezbollah and works for Darth Vader.

Man, you are only proving my point: you are irrationally vindictive toward her. I believe her real sin for the left, was she beat Bernie Sanders in the primaries. I liked Bernie too, but he wouldn't have done a good job as chief executive. His role is to be a rebel, never the man himself.

Quill come on, don't play dumb
everyone knows what 'speaking fees' are.

Your post is exactly why Trump won. and really Trump needed to win, the partisans of the USA have just gotten stupid on both sides, the nation cannot function because they are both swimming in complete Bullshit trying to make out their teams shit don't stink.

Like scrat standing on the outrside it is as plain as day.
Maybe it's cultural and you expect that jesus like leaders exist outside of fairytales

Original Quill wrote:

scrat wrote:
With all due respect you're also trying to defend the indefensible, crooked Hilary tried her best to cover up her criminality, the emails, surely you must ask yourself what we're the contents that caused her to lie to the FBI, the Clinton foundation smothered in corruption from arms deals and just about every other deal all stained with blood money, the cheating and manipulation of Bernie Sanders, the derogatory dismissal of his supporters, the defence of rapists and the denial and obfuscation at every turn, all displayed for public view and you just know that more will crawl out of the woodwork if an investigation were to ever take place.

She's as bent as a nine bob note, and the fact that your electorate voted for a bigoted idiot like Trump in place of her, shows the depth of contempt your electorate hold her in.

Trump could turn out to be a nightmare, but IMO Clinton was seen as someone who hid in the shadows, far too Machiavellian for a modern democracy with enough nukes to destroy the planet, over and over again.

You forgot to explain how she's behind Hezbollah and works for Darth Vader.

Man, you are only proving my point: you are irrationally vindictive toward her.  I believe her real sin for the left, was she beat Bernie Sanders in the primaries.  I liked Bernie too, but he wouldn't have done a good job as chief executive.  His role is to be a rebel, never the man himself.

You appear to be projecting, I'm not a Trump supporter nor am I a supporter of a Democratic Party that's presided over decades of missed opportunities and corruption, I see many similarities between the Clintons and the Blairs, both shocked at the scale of their comeuppance.

I read this recently, lost it and found it again:

Clinton’s deceptions tend to be defensive — her reputation is under attack and she’s trying to save face. As determined by PolitiFact, a political fact-checking service, her false statements often come in response to scandals and allegations against her. For instance, with regard to her private email server, she has said she “never received nor sent any material that was marked as classified” and that the server “was allowed” at the time. Both proved false.

Trump’s deceptions, by contrast, are more on the offensive, more self-promotional. He exaggerates his successes in the business world. He called his book "The Art of the Deal" the “best-selling business book of all time.” It’s not, according to PolitiFact.

And he creates allegations against his political opponents and minority groups out of thin air, making himself appear better by comparison. Among his false statements, according to PolitiFact: Hillary Clinton “invented ISIS,” even though the group predates Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. The United States is allowing “tens of thousands” of “vicious, violent” Muslim terrorists into the country every year. This attempt to justify his ban on Muslim immigration was also found false.

That distinction between Clinton and Путин Америки— offensive vs. defensive — has major implications for whether people view their lies as “legitimate” and morally acceptable, according to Matthew Gingo, a psychology professor at Wheaton College.

“Me lying to get myself out of trouble is not nearly as bad as me lying to get someone else in trouble,” Gingo said. “People view defense as more legitimate, such as physical self-defense.”

It sums up what little I really know about them, from an outside POV. I think it describes the two types of "lies" well and why it depends on what you're lying about,


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/why-clinton-is-less-trusted-when-trump-lies-much-more/?utm_term=.72e09ee8bb8b

veya_victaous wrote:Quill come on, don't play dumb
everyone knows what 'speaking fees' are.

Your post is exactly why Trump won. and really Trump needed to win, the partisans of the USA have just gotten stupid on both sides, the nation cannot function because they are both swimming in complete Bullshit trying to make out their teams shit don't stink.

Like scrat standing on the outrside it is as plain as day.
Maybe it's cultural and you expect that jesus like leaders exist outside of fairytales

So the US doesn't have a president.  Over 3-million won't follow him...more than those who will.

I'm happy.  The odds are over 50% he will end like Nixon.  Sounds good to me.

scrat wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You forgot to explain how she's behind Hezbollah and works for Darth Vader.

Man, you are only proving my point: you are irrationally vindictive toward her.  I believe her real sin for the left, was she beat Bernie Sanders in the primaries.  I liked Bernie too, but he wouldn't have done a good job as chief executive.  His role is to be a rebel, never the man himself.

You appear to be projecting, I'm not a Trump supporter nor am I a supporter of a Democratic Party that's presided over decades of missed opportunities and corruption, I see many similarities between the Clintons and the Blairs, both shocked at the scale of their comeuppance.

I don't think you know enough about it.  But to be sure, Blair was a loser.

You don't remember GWB and the Iraq war, do you?  That was the turn of world events, not Trump.  Trump is a kind of theater of the absurd that shows the American people just don't give a fuck anymore.  The USA ended when it embraced kidnapping, rape, torture, murder and disgrace.  Trump is the absurd after the ignominy.

eddie wrote:I read this recently, lost it and found it again:

Clinton’s deceptions tend to be defensive — her reputation is under attack and she’s trying to save face. As determined by PolitiFact, a political fact-checking service, her false statements often come in response to scandals and allegations against her. For instance, with regard to her private email server, she has said she “never received nor sent any material that was marked as classified” and that the server “was allowed” at the time. Both proved false.

Trump’s deceptions, by contrast, are more on the offensive, more self-promotional. He exaggerates his successes in the business world. He called his book "The Art of the Deal" the “best-selling business book of all time.” It’s not, according to PolitiFact.

And he creates allegations against his political opponents and minority groups out of thin air, making himself appear better by comparison. Among his false statements, according to PolitiFact: Hillary Clinton “invented ISIS,” even though the group predates Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. The United States is allowing “tens of thousands” of “vicious, violent” Muslim terrorists into the country every year. This attempt to justify his ban on Muslim immigration was also found false.

That distinction between Clinton and Путин Америки— offensive vs. defensive — has major implications for whether people view their lies as “legitimate” and morally acceptable, according to Matthew Gingo, a psychology professor at Wheaton College.

“Me lying to get myself out of trouble is not nearly as bad as me lying to get someone else in trouble,” Gingo said. “People view defense as more legitimate, such as physical self-defense.”

It sums up what little I really know about them, from an outside POV. I think it describes the two types of "lies" well and why it depends on what you're lying about,


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/why-clinton-is-less-trusted-when-trump-lies-much-more/?utm_term=.72e09ee8bb8b

The US won't be entering any war in the next 4-years. Somehow, my program ends up a winner. Even if Trump betrays his base and tries to move against ISIS, where is he going to get the troops? The military needs money and it need manpower...and Trump has betrayed the men, and the loser Republican Congress holds the purse-strings.

Any way you cut it, we stay out of the shit, and I win.

Republicans investigated Vince Foster. Found nothing. Republicans investigated Whitewater -- found nothing.

They spent years investigating Benghazi -- nothing. The FBI apparently investigated Clinton's emails twice -- nothing.

If that happened to literally anybody besides Hillary Clinton, around the time of the second email investigation at least everybody would be saying it was just harassment. But apparently there's nothing too bad to do to "Crooked Hillary" regardless of whether you're ever able to prove anything.

Ben Reilly wrote:Republicans investigated Vince Foster. Found nothing. Republicans investigated Whitewater -- found nothing.

They spent years investigating Benghazi -- nothing. The FBI apparently investigated Clinton's emails twice -- nothing.

If that happened to literally anybody besides Hillary Clinton, around the time of the second email investigation at least everybody would be saying it was just harassment. But apparently there's nothing too bad to do to "Crooked Hillary" regardless of whether you're ever able to prove anything.

Women don't belong in charge. That is the American message. Anyone else, it would be boys will be boys.

Hillary? Think we can get her for 84-cents on the dollar?

Original Quill wrote:

scrat wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You forgot to explain how she's behind Hezbollah and works for Darth Vader.

Man, you are only proving my point: you are irrationally vindictive toward her.  I believe her real sin for the left, was she beat Bernie Sanders in the primaries.  I liked Bernie too, but he wouldn't have done a good job as chief executive.  His role is to be a rebel, never the man himself.

You appear to be projecting, I'm not a Trump supporter nor am I a supporter of a Democratic Party that's presided over decades of missed opportunities and corruption, I see many similarities between the Clintons and the Blairs, both shocked at the scale of their comeuppance.

I don't think you know enough about it.  But to be sure, Blair was a loser.

You don't remember GWB and the Iraq war, do you?  That was the turn of world events, not Trump.  Trump is a kind of variety act that shows the American people just don't give a fuck anymore.  The USA ended when it embraced kidnapping, rape, torture, murder and disgrace.  Trump is the absurd after the ignominy.

I disagree; Trump is like the end of the horror movie where you think the monster is dead, but then his eyes snap open and he claims one last victim before the heroes can finally put him down.

Americans have been getting more liberal for decades and nothing has changed except that the Trump campaign, the FBI, the Russian government, fake Facebook articles and her own baggage were ultimately enough to keep Clinton from claiming the 77,800 votes spread over three states who would have given her the Electoral College.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Republicans investigated Vince Foster. Found nothing. Republicans investigated Whitewater -- found nothing.

They spent years investigating Benghazi -- nothing. The FBI apparently investigated Clinton's emails twice -- nothing.

If that happened to literally anybody besides Hillary Clinton, around the time of the second email investigation at least everybody would be saying it was just harassment. But apparently there's nothing too bad to do to "Crooked Hillary" regardless of whether you're ever able to prove anything.

Women don't belong in charge.  That is the American message.  Anyone else, it would be boys will be boys.  

Hillary?  Think we can get her for 84-cents on the dollar?

You seem to have become defeatist and cynical since this election -- just saying.

Lord Independent Thoughts wrote:

Quill wrote:The Russians rigged the election by hacking into those voting machines that are reachable through the Internet.

Oh, boy... someone hand that guy his tinfoil hat.

Of course we are disappointed. But 52% of Americans will work to make sure America fails for the next four years. Plaid and polka dots don't go together.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Women don't belong in charge.  That is the American message.  Anyone else, it would be boys will be boys.  

Hillary?  Think we can get her for 84-cents on the dollar?

You seem to have become defeatist and cynical since this election -- just saying.

The word is "resolved".  I like your article: keep up the heat on Trump's legitimacy, over on the next thread.  I'm just standing down at the extreme end, saying what is the goal.  

As I say, the point of failure for America was under GWB.  Trump is the aftermath...the theater of the absurd, as I call it, which shows that America has really given up.  The country needs to see America utterly collapse before recovery can start.

That's the real assessment. It's no longer a battle, with heroes and white hats. It's surgery now, with pain and excision...and hopefully, unconsciousness.

How can you say something like "America has given up" when Clinton got more than 2.8 million more votes than Trump, and Trump's E.C. victory was predicated on less than 80,000 votes?

You know the demographics of that 80,000 -- if they're even alive when the next election rolls around, they're probably going to sit it out due to disgust at being duped the way they were.

Original Quill wrote:

scrat wrote:
You appear to be projecting, I'm not a Trump supporter nor am I a supporter of a Democratic Party that's presided over decades of missed opportunities and corruption, I see many similarities between the Clintons and the Blairs, both shocked at the scale of their comeuppance.

I don't think you know enough about it.  But to be sure, Blair was a loser.

You don't remember GWB and the Iraq war, do you?  That was the turn of world events, not Trump.  Trump is a kind of theater of the absurd that shows the American people just don't give a fuck anymore.  The USA ended when it embraced kidnapping, rape, torture, murder and disgrace.  Trump is the absurd after the ignominy.

I left the states in 1999, Clinton was president, the two towers stood and the Glass Steagall act had just been repealed, Wall Street was abuzz with heady greed.

Clinton or "slick willie" as he was referred too at that time opened the flood gates on greed, perhaps that was the start of your decline.

As for not knowing enough about it, I know enough to agree with assessment of the American electorate, they voted in a great man as your current president and they would of voted in Bernie Sanders but the DNC didn't wish to take that risk, the fear of losing all those special interest groups and financial benefactors was a tad too much, instead they cheated him out of it and placed crooked Hilary in his stead.

Trump rode the wave of discontent, and now you're reaping that whirlwind, who do I blame?, I blame democrats like yourself who trundled on blinkered by the belief that the electorate would break another glass ceiling and choose a woman, if that woman was not Hilary Clinton they might well have!

Blair did some good stuff, he stayed in power for a decade, he placed Great Britain back on the world stage, and you'll struggle to find anyone who considered him a loser, past his sell by date perhaps, bitterness has clouded your judgement, you need to stand back, look at the bigger picture and reflect on the reality, only then can you begin to start afresh.

scrat wrote:Trump rode the wave of discontent, and now you're reaping that whirlwind, who do I blame?, I blame democrats like yourself who trundled on blinkered by the belief that the electorate would break another glass ceiling and choose a woman, if that woman was not Hilary Clinton they might well have!

I would agree to this extent.

1. The discontent that Trump rode was discontent with an African American as president...and with a betrayal of American values.  America is a racist nation.  I don’t know how much time you spent outside of New York City, but you would have had to spend a lot of time in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana and Texas to understand the depth and breadth of this theme in American life.

2. Most people who try to read America cherry-pick incidents that fit with their preconceived ideology.  Liberals will focus on black lives matter or they might rail against the American ego-maniacal lust for wars; conservatives will focus on images of black women having too many children, and collecting payment on welfare checks.  Both have truth to them, but to really read America you have to get above it all…and develop a theory of America.

Several themes dominate the American canvas.  A predominate one is racism, but in the main most of the theories do not particularly relate to the issues that are talked about during campaigns…eg, jobs, abortion, wages, and so forth.

3. One theory is that Americans live in a bubble, in which they have their own little dreams, interpretations and myths: we are the best; guns are good; America has never lost a war; Americans are truth; America is always opposed to people like Nazis;  America has found the panacea for the maladies of the rest of the world; Americans are the good guys…the ones riding the white horse and wearing the white hat.

4. Then there comes the day when the bubble bursts: it is discovered that some Americans lied; they got us into a war; in which we were the invaders and clearly, in the role of the bad guys; that Americans resorted to kidnapping; that Americans raped someone’s sister; that they tortured people; that they murdered…all in a place where they had no business being in the first place...on someone else's shores, the very thing we would resent.

5. Americans do one of two things: 1) they embrace the truth, but change their values: bad is good; we need torture; their daughters deserved to be raped; the media lies; all things politically correct are ipso facto wrong, indeed because ‘correct’ means ‘incorrect’; all the world is turned upside.  Sound familiar?  Those are the Trumpsters.  Are you surprised when Trump said our soldiers are losers, our generals are rubbish, and we need to make religion a litmus test for being American?  Don’t be…bad is good, remember?  This is the America that has won the election in 2016; 2) alternatively, some Americans hold on to the values, but plot ways to right America.

6. Now do you see why I say that Trump wasn’t the turning point?  Look for causes, Trump was merely the effect.  The turning point was when the bubble burst in 2007…when Americans found all of the disappointments and learned that America wasn’t exceptional at all.  After a brief interlude with the black president, who conflicts with their fundamental precept of racial differences, and that’s waaaaay too much overload…people have gone crazy with values because reality no longer fits.  Fuck it…embrace the craziness and vote for the clown!!  Trump is the symptom of the aftermath (see 5.1, above).

7. Now, hopefully, you realize that the problem is much deeper than you supposed.  The craziness is explained and its roots go way deeper than you think…back, before two world wars, back before the Civil War, back to the founding when Americans adopted the misperception that they were exceptional…that their political system put to shame Europe’s kings and dukes, back to the formation of the bubble.

8. So, OK…the bubble has burst and here we are.  You can never go back, as Thomas Wolfe so aptly put it.  So, going forward (such a cliché), our task is twofold: 1) abandon the present; 2) develop a new vision…an new American Dream, with new and more realistic goals.

9. I totally acknowledge that Hillary was a vestige of the past.  A lot of us…our perception deceived us because having a woman leader seemed to be progressive, not regressive. But I too was deceived by the markers, and failed to engage my theory goggles.

But, nor was Bernie Sanders the right person.  You have to be a leader to be president—John Kennedy, FDR, Obama—and Sanders is a different kind of persona.  Sanders is a rebel.  He’s a Thomas Paine, not a George Washington.  He’s the right stripe, just not the right stuff.

10. So here we are, we’ve got four years and shouldn’t waste them.  We need to make Trump, and through him America, fail (lesson 1) so that we know the recovery has begun…the cancer must be excised.  The skin must be sliced, the black bile must be slowly, painfully drained, and the surgery sewn up. 

Then we need to rebuild (lesson 2) in a way that corrects for the meandering trail we have led.  We need physical therapists, to teach us how to walk again. I look upon conscious failure, not as a partisan matter as Republicans did, nor as a vindictive measure, but as the necessary surgery to cure the patient.  So, yes it will be painful, but it will also be remedial.  Only when we excise the cancer can we allow the body to heal, and thence grow.

Clinton defeated Sanders in the primary by 12 percentage points in the popular vote (Democratic primaries). She wasn't "placed" there by the DNC.

Sanders was far less qualified, with zero foreign policy experience. What people are trying to beat Clinton supporters over the head with now is that they went with a pragmatic choice over a dramatic choice.

while russia may or may not have interfered with the US elections, has anyone considered Obama's interfering with the UK referendum and Israeli elections?

Original Quill wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:Republicans investigated Vince Foster. Found nothing. Republicans investigated Whitewater -- found nothing.

They spent years investigating Benghazi -- nothing. The FBI apparently investigated Clinton's emails twice -- nothing.

If that happened to literally anybody besides Hillary Clinton, around the time of the second email investigation at least everybody would be saying it was just harassment. But apparently there's nothing too bad to do to "Crooked Hillary" regardless of whether you're ever able to prove anything.

Women don't belong in charge.  That is the American message.  Anyone else, it would be boys will be boys.  

Hillary?  Think we can get her for 84-cents on the dollar?

no, clinton doesn't belong in charge, a woman will eventually be president, but thank god it wont be her

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Women don't belong in charge.  That is the American message.  Anyone else, it would be boys will be boys.  

Hillary?  Think we can get her for 84-cents on the dollar?

no, clinton doesn't belong in charge, a woman will eventually be president, but thank god it wont be her

Never happen.  A woman can lead in a parliamentary system because the PM is elected by other MP's.  It's like our Speaker of the House...kind of a protected individual from the capriciousness of the public.  The head guy doesn't have to face a popularity contest like in the US.

The head guy in US politics has to stand alone, and it's a popularity contest.  He's got to be handsome, virile and self-confident...and most of all he has to be a picture of strength.  George H. W.  Bush (the father) projected a milquetoast image and notice he was rejected for a second term even tho he was times-10 the president his son was.  Likewise, Jimmy Carter, who was a bowl of sweetness, but not a bullish guy.  He couldn't buy a second term.  

America wants a manly president...it's more of a popularity contest than in these other systems.  He's a father figure. He's out front and has to be leading-man material, just like Hollywood.  That's the reason it won't happen.