• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Russia's Interference in 2016 Election Much More Pervasive Than Originally Thought

mgidm86 said:
If the "Reality Winners" of the country start deciding what should and what should not be kept secret - man we are doomed. This sounds more like a woman with an agenda, but I don't know enough about her. She could be just young and dumb.
Click to expand...
Her Twitter reveals that she is a Trump Hater. She wanted Bernie.
 
logger said:
Because she leaked documents I suppose. Intercept had the document and refuses to release it, which makes it, wait for it, FAKE NEWS.
Click to expand...


I am sure that she will be delighted to hear that she was arrested over FAKE NEWS.
 
Just to get this straight: Not having any effect proven beyond a reasonable doubt is a perfectly good reason not to be concerned when it's a foreign nation accused of tampering...but putting up barriers to the ability of US citizens to vote in the absence of any proven effect is perfectly reasonable.
 
skyeagle409 said:
Sit back and think why she was arrested in the first place. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out.
Click to expand...

Didn't you say you were retired from this business? The news is she leaked this document. Are we now to just assume the Russians hacked our elections?
 
Babbylonian said:
Just to get this straight: Not having any effect proven beyond a reasonable doubt is a perfectly good reason not to be concerned when it's a foreign nation accused of tampering...but putting up barriers to the ability of US citizens to vote in the absence of any proven effect is perfectly reasonable.
Click to expand...

You think we're not concerned about hacking? We're not concerned that the Russians changed the outcome of our elections, that is just ridiculous. This is what your side is suggesting?
 
William Parcher said:
Her Twitter reveals that she is a Trump Hater. She wanted Bernie.
Click to expand...

There is a legitimate conflict- I agree that security decisions and issues of what should be kept secret must be reserved for those at the top level who truly know how to make the appropriate choices in making information secret, who understand the sensitivity of the information (I will not derail this post by making the obvious allusion), and who make their choices without a political agenda. Absolutely! Yet if a person at a lower level finds convincing evidence of a true and very serious crime, say treason, and believe that the secret designation by the top administration is likely a political one, what are they to do? There are whistle blower laws that apply in other contexts and I can't help but feel that there is an argument for anyone in an organization questioning a "secret" being withheld from the American public. I do feel the correct first approach to to contact others in the government who do have the appropriate security clearance/decision making power and ask for them to intervene. Yet morally, I have a lot of sympathy for Winner.

And what her private views are have nothing to do with the accuracy of the document.

"She's a witch! She turned me into a newt!"

Instead I see her as primarily motivated by patriotism based on learning of an enemy of the USA trying to interfere in our democratic process. It is not as if her voting of Bernie puts her beyond the pale- this is completely and fully legitimate- indeed mainstream- citizenship and is totally irrelevant to her leaking of documents, which may or may not be legitimate as such, not because of her political views. Franky bringing up her political views is silly- would it be more okay as you see it if she supported Trump in the election? Personally, I think the document itself is important for the American public to learn about, and I can only see a minor security risk. Russia already knows that we believe they interfered with the election, although the details of what we have learned may not all be known to them. But of course I am not an expert.
 
Last edited:
funk de fino said:
As well those who are mind numbingly dumb and don't need the brain washing
Click to expand...


I think you have something there! Trump has convinced his supporters that they can stuff a hundred pounds of his nonsense into a 5-pound bag of reality.
 
logger said:
You think we're not concerned about hacking? We're not concerned that the Russians changed the outcome of our elections, that is just ridiculous. This is what your side is suggesting?
Click to expand...
I don't know who you think made the post to which you're replying but it was an individual person who on this forum is called "Babbylonian."
 
Giordano said:
There is a legitimate conflict- I agree that security decisions and issues of what should be kept secret must be reserved for those at the top level who truly know how to make the appropriate choices in making information secret, who understand the sensitivity of the information (I will not derail this post by making the obvious allusion), and who make their choices without a political agenda. Absolutely! Yet if a person at a lower level finds convincing evidence of a true and very serious crime, say treason, and believe that the secret designation by the top administration is likely a political one, what are they to do? There are whistle blower laws that apply in other contexts and I can't help but feel that there is an argument for anyone in an organization questioning a "secret" being withheld from the American public. I do feel the correct first approach to to contact others in the government who do have the appropriate security clearance/decision making power and ask for them to intervene. Yet morally, I have a lot of sympathy for Winner.

And what her private views are have nothing to do with the accuracy of the document. I see her as primarily motivated by patriotism based on learning of an enemy of the USA trying to interfere in our democratic process. It is not as if her voting of Bernie puts her beyond the pale- they are totally irrelevant to her actions, which may or may not be legitimate as such, not due to her political views. Personally, I think the document itself is important for the American public to learn about, and II can only see a minor security risk. Russia already knows that we believe they interfered with the election, although the details of what we have learned may not all be known to them. But of course I am not an expert.
Click to expand...
That lower level person doesn't know what intelligence is up to, they may in fact have just ****** up an entire investigation.
 
Babbylonian said:
I don't know who you think made the post to which you're replying but it was an individual person who on this forum is called "Babbylonian."
Click to expand...

meaning your side is pushing this narrative, hence the question, is this what you're also suggesting? Seems to be a simple question.
 
logger said:
You think we're not concerned about hacking? We're not concerned that the Russians changed the outcome of our elections, that is just ridiculous.
Click to expand...


Seems that is the case. An adversary interfered with our election process and you think that it is okay???
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
Of course, Winner shouldn't have given them the copies in the first place but rather just sent them a summary if she wanted to remain anonymous.
Click to expand...
But there is a problem with that. You can't claim authenticity of the summarized information sent by an anonymous person. You wouldn't know if it's something bogus that was simply made up by somebody.

Here they received a copy of the actual document. So then it's either legitimate or a skilled forgery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom