Monday, December 12, 2016

Bigger Then Watergate? MUCH Bigger... Much, Much, Much Bigger

>


How did Obama allow Russia to set up a hacking operation powerful enough to threaten democracy in France, Holland, Germany, install puppet governments in Hungary, Moldava and Bulgaria and determine the outcome of the presidential election in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio? And why are-- usually investigation-happy-- congressional Republican leaders Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan determined to prevent thorough look into this?

Over the weekend Lindsey Graham (R-SC) unleashed a twitter storm obliquely warning of Russian intentions:




And yesterday, he joined with Democratic Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, John McCain and Jack Reed, to issue a joint statement on the definitive Intelligence agencies assertions that Russia hacked the U.S. elections on behalf of Trump, implying that there is much more than the public has been told about Russian inteference with the election process, interference-- "grave threats... to our national security"-- being covered up by McConnell and Ryan. And by FBI Director James Comey.




Sunday McCain, who referred to Putin as a "thug" and a "killer," said that he will add a new subcommittee to the Senate's Armed Services Committee, dedicating to investigateing Russian hacks and chaired by Lindsey Graham. Ben Cardin, the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was on State of the Union and told Jake Tapper that "We need to find out exactly what has happened. What we do know is that Russia hacked us... What we need to do is have that type of investigation to find out what we should do about Russia... Russia," he repeated 3 times, "is not our friend." He referred to Putin's "corrupt regime" and said that "Whether they were trying to elect Donald Trump... that's something we need to take a look at. We need to find out and then take action."




Meanwhile, Alex Younger, the head of Britain's MI6-- their version of the CIA-- at a first-of-its-kind (for him) press conference at MI6 headquarters, told the press that "the connectivity that is at the heart of globalisation can be exploited by states with hostile intent to further their aims deniably. They do this through means as varied as cyber-attacks, propaganda or subversion of democratic process. The risks at stake are profound and represent a fundamental threat to our sovereignty; they should be a concern to all those who share democratic values."


Younger’s comments come after America has accused Vladimir Putin of trying to disrupt its presidential election by hacking political organisations and amid fears Russian spies will also try to undermine upcoming elections in Germany and France.

...Younger said the threat was posed by states “whose very survival owes to the strength of their security capabilities.”

British spies trying to defeat the threat faced complex and risky work “often with the full weight of the state trying to root us out,” he said.


By the way, Trump did not have a massive landslide victory. He lost the popular vote by the biggest number of any president in the modern era-- 65,746,544 (48.2%) for Clinton to just 62,904,682 (46.2%) for himself. 231,556,622 Americans were eligible to vote and 62,904,682 voted for Trump, which is just 28%. That means that 72% of eligible voters chose to not vote for him. That's a massive landslide. And his electoral college win (if they even all vote for him)-- 306 (56.9%) to 232 (43.1%)-- is certainly not a landslide. It was the 46th "biggest" electoral college win out of 58 elections. Compare Trump's win with how presidents did before Russia was permitted to hack elections for their puppet candidate:



Labels: , ,

11 Comments:

At 6:15 AM, Anonymous Hone said...

What about all of those absentee and other ballots that were summarily discounted? Isn't this worthy of a Supreme Court case?

Bernstein, of Woodward and Bernstein fame, says Trump is far worse than Nixon. Maybe Congress should look into impeaching Trump right out of the gate. Wouldn't that be something? No chance of that, however - Frank Rich wrote a great historical perspective about American Nazi collaborators, and we now have the current version holding the cards in both the Senate and the House. The Republicans have not stood up to Trump and they will not. Self interest and greed trump democracy, after all.

 
At 6:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well noted, Hone.

While Russia may have hacked and even altered counts in key states, it is interesting to say the least that they knew so much more than ANYONE else about just where to affect changes just enough to make their puppet the "winner".

And thank gawd we have federal judges who just won't stand for recounting votes in an election to make sure the totals are correct. The supremes found in 2000 that counting actual, you know, votes would possibly harm the declared winner, and that winner was THEIR puppet, so they said DO NOT COUNT. Most recently the Michigan recount was spiked by the federal bench, presumably on similar grounds.

And the Rs stripped and flipped and suppressed in 2000, 2004... (Fl, OH...) and the Ds stripped, flipped and suppressed in the 2016 primaries ALL so that their people would win... yet we are not so upset about THIS?!?!?!?

Obamanation and his congress in 2008 did not set up any subcommittee nor did the doj investigate any of the official policies of vote fraud and suppression. Why?

Because government wants to skew voting for their own ends.

Yet when Russia may have done so, for their own ends, suddenly it's important???

I'm quite certain Putin sleeps very well at night knowing that the US Senate subcommittee will thoroughly investigate shit and it'll be led by Lindsey fucking graham, biggest horse's ass in the senate.

Aren't the republican dipshits afraid that any investigation might reveal all the official, policy-based, vote fraud and suppression? Would the media relate it if it did? Would any voters give a flying fuck?

 
At 7:56 AM, Blogger Dad said...

A broad stroke along with Comney's help is all the Russians needed to do... They did not have to target the key states specifically ..

Nate Silver: Clinton 'almost certainly' would've won if election were before Comey's letter http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/309871-nate-silver-clinton-almost-certainly-wouldve-won-if-election-were-before

 
At 8:32 AM, Blogger Mf Lehman said...

Quick questions, Dad: 1) Who insisted on nominating a candidate under FBI investigation? 2) Who put a Republican in charge of the FBI?

 
At 9:13 AM, Blogger Robert Miller said...

Unbelievable.

No, unbelievable.

But if you bought the MH17 okeydoke you believe this one.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/12/site-behind-washington-posts-mccarthyite-blacklist-appears-to-be-linked-to-ukrainian-fascism-and-cia-spying.html

 
At 10:15 AM, Blogger Dad said...

I am laughing reading that. ProporNot is way less susceptible to defamation suits than Trump for the things he has said about media outlets. Have you read their site and list?

"The Martens find PropOrNot background ties to the billionaire Koch brothers, to the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, to the Sarah Scaife Foundation (the Mellon fortune), ExxonMobil, US Senators Chris Murphy and Rob Portman, who tie into Citigroup d Goldman Sachs, “two Wall Street behemoths that would very much like to pivot the national debate to anything other than Wall Street power and corruption.” " google it. http://wallstreetonparade.com/2016/12/whos-behind-propornots-blacklist-of-news-websites/

 
At 4:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I don't believe that Putin actually interfered with the US presidential election, he's certainly smart enough to do so. He's also smart enough to stand back and let the US sink into an insane paranoia over this evidence-free canard, which will collapse global belief in the US as an indispensable ally and cause a growing disbelief in the American Exceptionalism which is in danger of causing WWIII. The leadership of the world is passing out of an America frozen in a global view locked into 1945 and toward one yet to form which is more current-day in its operations.

 
At 1:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quote: " ... the connectivity that is at the heart of globalisation can be exploited by states with hostile intent to further their aims deniably. They do this through means as varied as cyber-attacks, propaganda or subversion of democratic process."

It seems the victim empire 1) is projecting its pecadillos onto others and 2) doth hypocritically protest a bit much.

Why don't all these hysterical sanctimonious senators concentrate on the domestic destruction of the voting process, demonstrated clearly to have been carried out by both "major" US political parties in the last year alone.

IF any accusation is true, and I rather doubt it, then perhaps Putin has simply reacted to the US having not only imposed the war crime of "economic sanctions" but also Obumma having gloated that said sanctions had left the Russian economy in tatters his 2015 SOTU address, no less. tinyurl.com/mb5trqm

If Russia had left the US economy "in tatters" would we have restricted ourselves to "hacking" Russian elections?

John Puma

 
At 4:43 AM, Blogger Daro said...

http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1996/1101960715_400.jpg

 
At 5:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

coupla things:
Woodward and Bernstein were journalists. Now woodward is a power-fellating best-selling author.
Now we have no journalists so no Woodward and Bernstein... and noplace for them to work if anyone WANTED to be them.
Then we had an electorate who somewhat gave a flying fuck.
Today we have an electorate that re-elects this kind of shit. always.
Then we still had an illusion of democracy.
Today we are a corporate oligarchy fairly quickly evolving into a plutocratic tyranny.
Then, voters probably would have bitched about a plutocratic tyranny.
Today, we just elected one. And even if the other "candidate" had won, we'd STILL have elected one, but with very subtle differences.

 
At 11:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

PS

Re: non votes

By your own calculation; if 72.8% of eligible voters did NOT vote for Herr Hair, then 71.6% did not vote for HRC.

This approach hardly distinguishes HRC from Herr Hair but only reinforces the fact that these were perhaps the most despised pair of presidential candidates in history.

John Puma

 

Post a Comment

<< Home