Why do so many people blindly believe the US claims that Russia hacked the election?

There are a lot of people on the net spreading fake news, that there is no actual evidence that Russia did anything.

they also spread the LIE that the DNC hack was really an inside-job by Marc Rich who the DNC then murdered.

one has to wonder who these people work for.

who benefits from their tireless efforts?

 

Why don’t you educate us as to how Russia could have done what OBama said was absurd? If you’re implying Russia made Hillary lose...

 

scary how soo many people refuse to accept any evidence that Russia tried to mess with our election.

 

I am not implying anything. I am clearly stating that RUSSIA launched a sophisticated organized and coordinated military cyber attack on America with the aim at increase internal division AND hurting Hillary AND assisting trump in the process. I am stating clearly that the attack contributed bigly to the trumpian win. Was it the sole reason? No, but without it I doubt he would of won.

It was a brilliant piece of cyberwarfare in weaponizing social media and big data. Gotta give it to Putin. He is one helluva covert operator.

 

So brilliant that a larger portion of the united states population voted for Hillary Clinton than did Donald Trump?

 

Ah the old 'it's on RT' trick. Notice how you refuse to talk about who is in that RT video (Bill Binney who doesn't work for RT, but did work for intelligence agency -NSA), and what he is saying. Just saying 'it's RT' won't cut it. Bill is going on the few networks on TV that will give him a voice. You won't see this guy on CNN, ABC, NBC, etc... anytime soon. And can't I say the same thing about CNN that I you can about RT? CNN is basically US propaganda just like RT is Russian. The whole media atmosphere is garbage.

 

Pretty funny how your saying there was no Russian influence in the very same thread you're trying to influence with RT.

I'm sorry. I just don't give the Russian propaganda media a lot of weight on the issue of Russian interference in the election.

Maybe others find it persuasive.

If I was relying on CNN, you might have a point about CNN.

 

That is true.

But there never has been a candidate for President who promoted it, fed on it, and stoked it as thoroughly as Donald Trump.

Now, after driving a deep wedge into the existing divides in the US, he seems to be determined to take his act abroad.

 

That is false. Quite a few fake news websites were directly traced back to the Russians. Others were tracked back to a band of Rumanians. But we learned last Friday that they were actually a Russian operation as well.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...16af66098fe_story.html?utm_term=.677f41cfb8f0

 

The history of evidence is clearly demonstrating a pattern that proves willful ignorance cannot be cured with education, especially for those who loathe facts.

 

What am I trying to influence? I am simply stating the fact that that man is a former NSA official with 30 years experience. You dismiss him entirely and his credentials just because he's on 'RT'.

 

So OBama lied then when he said Russia couldn’t have effected the election results? And there is no history of evidence. There is NO evidence Russia did anything to change anyone’s votes. Our own media did far more damage than Russian Facebook trolling. But keep wishing and dreaming. Maybe you can impeach him after he another 6 yrs. Have a nice night.

And next time don’t misquote me or consider yourself reported.

 

Yes, that brilliant. Or perhaps you aren't aware of the massive amount of detailed individual personal data that the Russians were able to obtain from the social media platforms. Perhaps you are unaware of those electoral college votes to trump from blue states that hillary thought was in the bag? Perhaps you are unaware of the power of targetted messaging DESIGNED to elicit a certain emotional response. Perhaps you are unaware of confirmation bias and how to exploit it?

It was a perfect storm with the most unlikely outcome actually happening. But I get how trumpians need some sort of smoking gun because they are incapable of understanding how easily they can be manipulated. Funny that they are under constant bombardment and are oblivious to how influenced they are by them.

Those damn KGB boys who never went away are absolutely brilliant at dirty tricks and covert ops. This russian military cyber campaign is a testament to that nefarious brilliance. Truly historic and will be studied in history books for centuries to come. As will the pathetic confused response from Trump's America.

 

Then why did the targeted messaging, designed to elicit a certain emotional response, simply fail to earn Donald Trump the popular vote as well as the electoral vote?

 

Translation: The media is the real enemy of the people. Russians are just competitors.

Disagreed, but glad to see you consistently support Trump no matter what he says.

 

Because ...

a) every US election campaign is a single mud-pit and you have always been fouling each other with dirt and trying to find the other's corpses in the basement.
But it has never been so dirty as 2016 ... which was also because there was never so much BS and fake messages in the social media. Why?

b) The whole time Trump talked more friendly to Russia than Hillary did ... for example on the subject of Syria where Trump claimed that he wanted to withdraw as well as from Afghanistan (OK, today we know better the real truth than at that time). Russia has ... astonished and undermined ... in fact also own national interests and puts them higher than those of the USA.

c) Russia has the technical and intelligence capabilities to do exactly for what russia is accused here ... and they had a motive as well. And, in fact, there's enough evidence that the Trump quagmire also had closer ties with Russia ... although the Trump followers and fans of course dispute the blood in all the threads here or the conclusion of irrefutable evidence and facts differently see!

d) the US itself has done exactly the same in dozens of cases already demonstrably ... so just interfered in foreign election campaigns and elections with the CIA & Co. ...

 

Because the difference in popular vote only existed in a few select HEAVILY Liberal, highly populous counties in CA and NY. By looking at the national county voting map, it shows where more votes mattered and a more accurate picture then just numbers. Hillary could have won by 20 million more votes in CA and it wouldn't have mattered, because you can't have highly populated, tiny portions of the US controlling everyone, which is what the nation was founded on. Its not hard to see what could happen if too much power is concentrated in 2 coastal regions. Hillary demonstrated exactly what would happen, because she simply ignored the entire middle of the country. Didn't even bother with most of them, which showed she wouldn't have bothered to care about them AFTER she won. Luckily sanity prevailed. Sadly, Trump was that option =(

 

Because is all about the electoral vote. YOu might want to examine how that went and how many states that hillary thought were in the bag so she ignored, she lost.

The Russian campaign also tried to suppress the vote amongst key demographics.

Its rather interesting that those who were effected by the campaign, either directly or indirectly, are for the most part unaware of it.
But for some reason they all seem to think they KNOW it wasn't effective. Dunning Kruger is not a partisan condition.

 

If the targeted messaging that is being referred to, was directed at individuals based on their personal information, could it not be that they already held beliefs similar to what was contained within the targeted messaging, and thus have no reason to believe that they were affected since they were being told what they already held to be the truth?

 

Of course a certain % of those targetted were for the purpose of confirmation bias reinforcement/entrenchment. Give them what they expect or want to see/hear/read. That was an essential part of the campaign. When you do it on both sides of the partisan divide, it sure does stir em up. Social conflict being one of its major goals.

Then of course there are the independents and "centerists" and this is where the influencing of a few % points makes all the difference in the world. Especially when it strategically targets the "in the bag" states that Hillary and her stupid campaign ignored.
And the cherry in all this is the DNC hacking and release of those emails. For many, after being bombarded with all kinds of bullshit from either side, this was the "emotionally driven" tipping point.

Like I said, the russian campaign is as historic as it is brilliant. Putin will be known as the man who weaponized social media.
It will be studied and analysed by the military, social scientists, communication and technology professionals for decades.

It will be fascinating to see how national security strategies build defenses. Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease and when it comes to freedom of expression, if that goes, then democracy can't be far behind.

 

Amazing as the last indictment of both Russia military leaders and hackers have all manner of fine details including isp addresses, email address and texts with time stamps and so on.

There is no question that we had been attacked by the Russians or that the attacks on Clinton mail servers started within hours of Trump asking the Russians for help in that regards.

Twenty nine pages of details see the link below,

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

 

The willfully ignorant and the ideologically entrenched will always reject facts.

Dunning Kruger plays a big part in it also, as the "show me proof" crowd plainly exhibits. The proof is before them but they can't understand it because they can't discern between what they don't know and what they think they know.

So many definitive judgments predicated on ignorance, no more glaring than when it comes to the underpinnings of the technologies they take for granted every day.

 

When did we go to war with Russia? Sounds like the narrative you are pushing is something Harry Reid would come up. Yell the lie even if it isn't true. Repeat the lie, repeat the lie, repeat the lie. Hell! repeat the lie and pretty soon even you believe it. So who fed you the intelligence your so quick to believe?

James Clapper (former NSA director) - Lied to Congress about surveillance of American citizens. Lied about FISA warrant.

John Brennen - (former CIA director) - Lied to Congress about spying on staff and members of Congress. Lied to Congress about the killing of civilians using drones.

Lied to ​

Congress about knowing about the Trump Dossier.

James Comey - (former FBI director) - Lied to Congress about coordination between agencies and internal house cover-up of Hillary Clinton crimes.

Andrew McCabe - (Deputy FBI Director) - Lied to Congress about Trump Dossier and about Clinton investigation.

Of course you already knew about these lies , but, you continue to propagate the narrative about Russian collusion ( for those, who don't know, collusion in itself is not a federal crime, except in the rare case of Anti-trust law).

Trump's only issue with NATO is to have members anti up more money that they all agreed to do. More money = more and better equipment and more troops to take on Russia.

 

That's false. In 2002 there was no confirmed intelligence that Saddam had revived a major WMD operation. There were people in the intelligence community who said the exact opposite. Not only is it the consensus of our intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in our election, but tRump's appointees also agree. Dan Coats, Chris Wray, Rod Rosenstein....surely you do not believe they are all Deep State, do you?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15366-2004Feb5_2.html

THE NUCLEAR CARD: The Aluminum Tube Story -- A special report.; How White House Embraced Suspect Iraq Arms Intelligence

https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/...aluminum-tube-story-a-special-report-how.html

On numerous occasions, Dick Cheney cited a report that 9/11 conspirator Mohammed Atta had met in Prague with an Iraqi intelligence officer. He said this after the CIA and FBI concluded that this meeting never took place.

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/9/12123022/george-w-bush-lies-iraq-war

 

Add up all those supposed lies and they don't amount to the same number of lies Trump tells in a weekend. (can't be bothered with refuting at least three of those bullshit bullets)

BULLSHIT. ONly an idiot would believe Trump pitching a fit in the most embarassing and ignorant representation of how NATO actually works, was actually a big problem that only he could solve. He wanted to refight a fight that Obama had already won.

And he does have all kinds of issues with NATO including article 5 cause he doesn't want to go to war on behalf of the very aggressisve (but good) people of Montenegro. He has issues with possible new members. And to top it off after that ridiculous disaster of a NATO summit, he claims it as an acknowledged victory!

I have heard of deliberate suspension of disbelief, but I always thought it was a transient phenomena, not a permanent character trait. Seems I was wrong.