Suppose Russia did try help Trump win through hacking, that is not something Trump could control. And the failure is on the security of the various agencies and of course Hillary Clinton's ill advised plan of using an email server in her closet.
So what is the end game here? You'll agree actual voter fraud did not occur so then the goal will be to increase security of government information correct?
Maybe not something he can control, but something he can reward by changing foreign policy to something that better enables Russia.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Which is stupid, if Obama wanted to undercut Trump he would have released this information before the election instead of choosing to not release it so that the White House didn't appear partisan, and wouldn't be working with Trump to try and make the transfer of power as smooth as possible.
Laughable. Obama didn't do anything before the election because he didn't think Trump had any chance of winning.
The House, Senate, and Obama were briefed about this in September, and Obama got together a group from all sides (including chairmen and members from both houses' committees on intelligence and homeland security) and to do a non-partisan full disclosure. It also included Comey and Jeh Johnson. Letting states know this was going on could allow them to take any measures they thought necessary to protect the election process.
Mitch McConnell (who's wife was hired by Trump as secretary of transportation, and who won't recuse himself from voting for her confirmation) threatened to politicize the issue if such a release was made, and Obama chose to not release the information before the election rather than have the White House appear partisan.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
I'm talking about the regime of corrupted American millionaires and Russian politicians who have successfully managed overthrow a western democratic superpower and replace it with a racist, misogynist, fascist dictatorship.
(Republican Executive, Republican Legislative, and soon-to-be Republican Judicial = dictatorship.)
The Following User Says Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
The House, Senate, and Obama were briefed about this in September, and Obama got together a group from all sides (including chairmen and members from both houses' committees on intelligence and homeland security) and to do a non-partisan full disclosure. It also included Comey and Jeh Johnson. Letting states know this was going on could allow them to take any measures they thought necessary to protect the election process.
Mitch McConnell (who's wife was hired by Trump as secretary of transportation, and who won't recuse himself from voting for her confirmation) threatened to politicize the issue if such a release was made, and Obama chose to not release the information before the election rather than have the White House appear partisan.
Do you think the results of the election should be overturned?
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Doesn't the answer to that question depend on what a factual inquiry reveals no matter what side you're on?
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to AltaGuy For This Useful Post:
If the inquiry shows that there was coordination between the Trump campaign and any hanky panky with the electoral process then yes I think that the election results are void.
If there is just evidence of other parties interfering with the process and Trump was not directly involved, then no.
That's my opinion FWIW...
__________________
"WHAT HAVE WE EVER DONE TO DESERVE THIS??? WHAT IS WRONG WITH US????" -Oiler Fan
"It was a debacle of monumental proportions." -MacT
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fozzie_DeBear For This Useful Post:
Julian Assange said the Russians were not the source of the Podesta emails.
Assange is a Russian stooge. His statements are worthless.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
What are all of you going to cling to when he gets inaugurated next month.
I wouldn't have voted for trump, I'm disappointed he won because it means there won't be a good republican in office for at least 8 years, probably more, but all these attempts to subvert democracy are getting ridiculous. So far we have the recount, the movement for the electors to choose someone else, and now this grand conspiracy of Russians hacking emails. Everyone freaked out when Trump said he wouldn't accept the results and now they're just stooping to his level.
If the inquiry shows that there was coordination between the Trump campaign and any hanky panky with the electoral process then yes I think that the election results are void.
If there is just evidence of other parties interfering with the process and Trump was not directly involved, then no.
That's my opinion FWIW...
If you could show Trump involvement you might get him impeached but unless you were rigging voting machines I don't think you could justify overturning results because he coordinated to steal and release embarrassing info. It's basicly watergate at that point.
So let's see what you're describing as "attempts to subvert democracy".
Quote:
So far we have the recount
How does a recount subvert democracy? It actually ensures that the democratic result is accurate.
Quote:
the movement for the electors to choose someone else
This is undemocratic, but it's not a subversion of anything, it's a potentiality built into the system. Not that it matters, because it absolutely won't happen.
Quote:
and now this grand conspiracy of Russians hacking emails.
It's a conspiracy theory? Russian involvement is well known, it's not even controversial, and now you've got a federal agency confirming it. This is fact. If a foreign nation deliberately interfered to alter the result of an election, that is the subversion of democracy you're looking for. Whether it actually rises to that level such that the result should be rejected is arguable, depending on what concrete findings are made.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Fair enough, I meant the recount more as a not accepting the results. The other two are subverting democracy.
In regards to the Russians I mean, IF they're responsible it's a pretty big leap that the release of podesta's emails effected voting patterns in any meaningful way. Unless they can find solid evidence that Trump enlisted their help, which would be hard to find given how politicized the USA is these days.
but all these attempts to subvert democracy are getting ridiculous.
The things you list aren't subverting democracy at all though.
Recounts are a good idea, I think they should be a staple of the system; every election a random set of counties or states should be selected for spot recounts. Not because the results are suspect, but to validate the processes. One doesn't have a backup procedure that's never tested, voting is even more important.
Look at the aborted Michigan recounts, there were a number of precincts that could not be recounted. The tally from the computer did not match the number of ballots, and if they are even out by one then the precinct is by law "not recountable". That seems like the opposite of what should happen; if the computers and the physical count don't line up, then a recount should be mandatory, not declared impossible! I don't understand why that isn't bigger news.
The faithless electors thing won't change the outcome, but even if it did, that's the way the system is setup so it's hardly subversion to utilize a system the way it was designed. If anything maybe so much attention will finally prompt some change to a system that some thing is long overdue for it.
And Russia hacking the emails, the info from the intelligence communities, the recent statement from the CIA.. again not subverting democracy, rather highlighting an outside actor's attempts to subvert it. It's not just Democrats talking about it, Republicans are also saying things need to be looked at. Not because they want the election result to be overturned (I don't think anything short of a video with Trump and Putin talking about what Trump is supposed to do once elected would accomplish that), but because the obvious interference is something that should be a concern regardless of party affiliation.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
In regards to the Russians I mean, IF they're responsible it's a pretty big leap that the release of podesta's emails effected voting patterns in any meaningful way. Unless they can find solid evidence that Trump enlisted their help, which would be hard to find given how politicized the USA is these days.
The focus has been on Russia's interference, not many are accusing Trump of being complicit.
And I don't think it's unreasonable at all to think Podesta's emails had a meaningful impact. The whole Pizza place child trafficking conspiracy is rooted in that and look how significant and persistent that's been. Some posters here (and lots online) think the whole election campaign narrative was planned in advance and orchestrated by the media and Clinton, and use the Podesta emails as evidence. "News" stories about Podesta and Clinton being satanists because of a dinner invitation in Podesta's emails had huge circulations. Fake news outstripped real news on Facebook leading up to the election date, the amount of attention these kinds of stories were getting on social media was huge.
Add in that Trump won by a 100,000 votes... I don't think you can point at any one thing and blame it (it's too complex for that), but I also don't think they can be discounted either.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The bottom line on the recounts is that Michigan was won by a higher margin that the largest historical recount vote shift. So it's a useless exercise, and if you're going to go so far in depth with any possible voting irregularities you might have to look at the number of undocumented immigrants that voted in colorado and New Mexico.
Direct and impactful foreign influence in any country's elections is concerning but you'd have a hell of a time proving that it made any influence. I guess I'm just a bit cynical because all these attempts are mostly spearheaded by people who were mad that their candidate lost. Just accept the result and move on, maybe wait until trump ACTUALLY does something as president before calling him a fascist or shouting for impeachment.
Let's also stop pretending that fake news only benefited trump. Idiots on all sides will believe stupid conspiracy theories.
All the states had margins of victory larger than any historical recount vote shift. The recount wasn't spearheaded by people who were mad that their candidate lost; Stein is VERY anti-Clinton to the point of ridiculousness. She says she wanted a recount to validate the process. Believe her or not (maybe she just wanted the donations, maybe the attention), but it wasn't started because she was mad her candidate lost and it wasn't in the expectation that the results would change.
The faithless electors has been more about Trump's unsuitability than Clinton losing from what the electors themselves have been saying (which is part of their job, or at least was at one point).
And the CIA report also wasn't spearheaded by people who were mad their candidate lost, since it originated months before the election even happened and was presented to people from both sides of the aisle in both houses and the President.
Would be interested in more information about undocumented immigrants voting in Colorado and New Mexico.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
