What exactly are we accusing the Russians of doing concerning our election?

ikalugin · 06-03-17, 09:41 AM

http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentar...ssia_want_7297
This article may be of interest.

vienna · 06-06-17, 05:06 AM

I'd been waiting to see what the other views might be on the original post by Platapus (good points, all, Platapus). I tend to view some of the efforts by investigative, legislative, and, sometimes, judicial entities to be more of a definitive and precedent-setting exercise. Sometimes you have to go through a process, not to reach a fully satisfactory conclusion, but, rather to define and codify the proper actions and limits to be the framework if a transgression or particular similar situation should occur in the future. The impeachment of Bill Clinton, although a seeming waste of time, effort and money to many, served the function of providing a fleshed-out guide of how a full, modern impeachment process should be conducted. An opportunity was missed in the 1970s when Nixon resigned rather than face full impeachment; it would have been a great learning experience for the US government and the citizens on the country on how to deal with a truly criminal impeachment case...

As far as the current Russian situation, there is also a great learning process opportunity. First of all, let's just get rid of the partisan aspect of the matter: we all know that if Obama or Clinton were facing the current situation, the same people who are decrying the efforts to investigate the election influence/tampering now in effect would be the loudest and most ardent in demanding just such investigations, so let's discard petty partisanship. Secondly, let's discard the Trump factor: as I have long stated, none of the investigations or reports have in any way directly linked Trump personally to any of the possible corruption allegations; all he had to do was just not say anything and let the process play out; if he's going to get nicked on anything, it will be due to his efforts, after the facts, to either obstruct justice or, if he is found to have proactively taken part in possible cover-up efforts, to have engaged in criminal conspiracy and/or subornation. while we're at it, let's leave Russia specifically out of this, as well...

The situation is this: allegations have been made of possible efforts by a foreign government, or their actors, to either influence or tamper with a Presidential election. Allegations are also some US citizens and/or other vested individuals in the US, either for personal financial or political gain, may have colluded with and assisted in the efforts by a foreign government to affect the election. The extent of or involvement in these efforts is not fully known nor are the means used to attempt to accomplish any of the goals. Some of the US citizens alleged to have colluded in the effort to affect the election are currently, or have been, officials in some of the highest and/or most sensitive levels of the government. The scope and means in which the efforts were undertaken are serious breaches of the security and integrity of the US election process, the means actually rising to the level of outright criminality. Without the politics or partisan colorings, the above charges, on their own, are very serious allegations worthy of serious scrutiny, if not full prosecution, in the end. The results of Legislative hearings, the investigative probes, and, if necessary the judicial holdings, will set the standard for what is or is not acceptable conduct in regards to the election process and will expose any flaws and breaches in the system so they can, hopefully, be remedied. There really hasn't been any comprehensive review of the electoral system since the days of the first paper ballots; technology, and its benefits and flaws, is very new territory. When the Constitution was enacted, the degree and pervasiveness of current technology was absolutely unimaginable, yet we continue as if we still live in a time without instant communication and the ability to use technology to corrupt the election process. If we don't act now to get to the bottom of the problems of and with our election systems, if we kick the can further down the road, the next instance of someone or something tampering with the most basic and fundamental cornerstone of our democracy could have a far more serious and dangerous result than we are now facing. It may seem like a waste of time and effort, but the expenditure needed to address a far greater crisis later on may be much more than we can muster. Its like a roof: either fix the leaks and cracks now or be faced with having to replace the roof later on, or, worse, having the roof fall in on you...

As a by-the-way, if there is any doubt of the very real possibility of foreign efforts to influence or tamper with the last Presidential elections, there is this:

Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election --

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/...2016-election/

The NSA has not denied the origin, authorship, or accuracy of the document; in fact, the person who leaked the report has been arrested and has confessed to copying and passing on the report. Here is a link to the actual document:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...arphishing.pdf

If there is any doubt of the need to settle the issue of foreign interference in the 2016 Elections and/or the active participation of US citizens in same, the above document should severely lessen any doubt. Who knew the greatest possible danger to the election process would come, not from home-grown "dead voters" but, rather, from foreign entities using modern technology? I don't know about anyone else, but the integrity of the election process is too important to just gloss over...

<O>

ikalugin · 06-06-17, 05:09 AM

Interference or influence?

vienna · 06-06-17, 05:13 AM

That's what investigation(s) will have to determine and that's why they are necessary...

<O>

ikalugin · 06-06-17, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna

That's what investigation(s) will have to determine and that's why they are necessary...

<O>

So there are reasonable reasons to believe that we interfered in the elections? From what I remember the official narrative was that there was no interference, if we use OP's terminology.

vienna · 06-06-17, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikalugin

So there are reasonable reasons to believe that we interfered in the elections? From what I remember the official narrative was that there was no interference, if we use OP's terminology.

Which official narrative? If you mean Russia's, that is already suspect and open to serious question; it is analogous to the police and investigators accepting the word of a bank robbery suspect as the absolute final truth; you might have to consider the suspect has more than a little incentive to lie...

If you mean the narrative of the Trump associates and their motivations, I refer you to the above paragraph...

If you mean the narrative of the data and activities surrounding the questions of influence or interference, I refer you to the multitude of reports and documents fully indicating something serious has occurred which warrants further investigation, if only to put to rest any questions and to ensure, if there has been any wrongdoing, it is appropriately addressed, and measures put in place to prevent a recurrence...

This attempt to shift the question from the actual core issues to a quibble over "influence" or "interference" is little more than a weak ploy to deflect from the issue; it is essentially a newer take on the old "What is is" question. It strongly gives the impression of, failing to adequately argue the facts or core issues, a fallback has been made to turn the argument from the substantive to the stylistic: we can't win the argument, so let's talk about the suits they're wearing. Weak...

If you really want to know if its influence or interference, I have a really great new suggestion: let's investigate properly and get a definitive answer...

<O>

ikalugin · 06-06-17, 01:02 PM

Before we do this, you really shouldnt get worked up emotionally as this leads to attacks against my person rather than my arguments.

Quote:

Which official narrative?

The USG and US mainstream media one ofc regarding the elections overall. For example did FBI (or other agencies) claim that there was interference (ie hacking voting machines)?

Quote:

If you mean the narrative of the data and activities surrounding the questions of influence or interference, I refer you to the multitude of reports and documents fully indicating something serious has occurred which warrants further investigation, if only to put to rest any questions and to ensure, if there has been any wrongdoing, it is appropriately addressed, and measures put in place to prevent a recurrence...

This attempt to shift the question from the actual core issues to a quibble over "influence" or "interference" is little more than a weak ploy to deflect from the issue; it is essentially a newer take on the old "What is is" question. It strongly gives the impression of, failing to adequately argue the facts or core issues, a fallback has been made to turn the argument from the substantive to the stylistic: we can't win the argument, so let's talk about the suits they're wearing. Weak...

If you really want to know if its influence or interference, I have a really great new suggestion: let's investigate properly and get a definitive answer...

First of all there is a significant difference between influence and interference, as it was already described by Platapus and there is no known evidence regarding Russian interference into the elections.

Secondly if we are discussing the influence then we are discussing degrees of influence Russia had over the US presidential elections as Russia would invariably have some degree of (indirect) influence by merely existing. As does for example Somalia.

Thridly the "evidence" that you have posted in the past regarding the influence (ie DNC hack stuff) is weak, especially in regards to attribution, as I have said before. Morever in that specific example I would view evidence as tainted and thus not credible because it was provided by a third party with vested interests (crowdstrike).

06-03-17, 09:41 AM	#1
ikalugin Ocean Warrior Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 3,212 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentar...ssia_want_7297 This article may be of interest. __________________ Grumpy as always.

06-06-17, 05:06 AM	#2
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	I'd been waiting to see what the other views might be on the original post by Platapus (good points, all, Platapus). I tend to view some of the efforts by investigative, legislative, and, sometimes, judicial entities to be more of a definitive and precedent-setting exercise. Sometimes you have to go through a process, not to reach a fully satisfactory conclusion, but, rather to define and codify the proper actions and limits to be the framework if a transgression or particular similar situation should occur in the future. The impeachment of Bill Clinton, although a seeming waste of time, effort and money to many, served the function of providing a fleshed-out guide of how a full, modern impeachment process should be conducted. An opportunity was missed in the 1970s when Nixon resigned rather than face full impeachment; it would have been a great learning experience for the US government and the citizens on the country on how to deal with a truly criminal impeachment case... As far as the current Russian situation, there is also a great learning process opportunity. First of all, let's just get rid of the partisan aspect of the matter: we all know that if Obama or Clinton were facing the current situation, the same people who are decrying the efforts to investigate the election influence/tampering now in effect would be the loudest and most ardent in demanding just such investigations, so let's discard petty partisanship. Secondly, let's discard the Trump factor: as I have long stated, none of the investigations or reports have in any way directly linked Trump personally to any of the possible corruption allegations; all he had to do was just not say anything and let the process play out; if he's going to get nicked on anything, it will be due to his efforts, after the facts, to either obstruct justice or, if he is found to have proactively taken part in possible cover-up efforts, to have engaged in criminal conspiracy and/or subornation. while we're at it, let's leave Russia specifically out of this, as well... The situation is this: allegations have been made of possible efforts by a foreign government, or their actors, to either influence or tamper with a Presidential election. Allegations are also some US citizens and/or other vested individuals in the US, either for personal financial or political gain, may have colluded with and assisted in the efforts by a foreign government to affect the election. The extent of or involvement in these efforts is not fully known nor are the means used to attempt to accomplish any of the goals. Some of the US citizens alleged to have colluded in the effort to affect the election are currently, or have been, officials in some of the highest and/or most sensitive levels of the government. The scope and means in which the efforts were undertaken are serious breaches of the security and integrity of the US election process, the means actually rising to the level of outright criminality. Without the politics or partisan colorings, the above charges, on their own, are very serious allegations worthy of serious scrutiny, if not full prosecution, in the end. The results of Legislative hearings, the investigative probes, and, if necessary the judicial holdings, will set the standard for what is or is not acceptable conduct in regards to the election process and will expose any flaws and breaches in the system so they can, hopefully, be remedied. There really hasn't been any comprehensive review of the electoral system since the days of the first paper ballots; technology, and its benefits and flaws, is very new territory. When the Constitution was enacted, the degree and pervasiveness of current technology was absolutely unimaginable, yet we continue as if we still live in a time without instant communication and the ability to use technology to corrupt the election process. If we don't act now to get to the bottom of the problems of and with our election systems, if we kick the can further down the road, the next instance of someone or something tampering with the most basic and fundamental cornerstone of our democracy could have a far more serious and dangerous result than we are now facing. It may seem like a waste of time and effort, but the expenditure needed to address a far greater crisis later on may be much more than we can muster. Its like a roof: either fix the leaks and cracks now or be faced with having to replace the roof later on, or, worse, having the roof fall in on you... As a by-the-way, if there is any doubt of the very real possibility of foreign efforts to influence or tamper with the last Presidential elections, there is this: Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election -- https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/...2016-election/ The NSA has not denied the origin, authorship, or accuracy of the document; in fact, the person who leaked the report has been arrested and has confessed to copying and passing on the report. Here is a link to the actual document: https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...arphishing.pdf If there is any doubt of the need to settle the issue of foreign interference in the 2016 Elections and/or the active participation of US citizens in same, the above document should severely lessen any doubt. Who knew the greatest possible danger to the election process would come, not from home-grown "dead voters" but, rather, from foreign entities using modern technology? I don't know about anyone else, but the integrity of the election process is too important to just gloss over... <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __

06-06-17, 05:09 AM	#3
ikalugin Ocean Warrior Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 3,212 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	Interference or influence? __________________ Grumpy as always.

06-06-17, 05:13 AM	#4
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,711 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	That's what investigation(s) will have to determine and that's why they are necessary... <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __