A declassified version of a US intelligence report on Russian hacking did not state whether the Kremlin's campaign to discredit Hillary Clinton affected the outcome of the election.

Yet President-elect Donald Trump said in a statement Friday after his meeting with intelligence officials that "there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election."

"While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat [sic] National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines," Trump said in the statement.

But the report, from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, specifically stated that it did not assess "the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election."

"The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or US public opinion," the report stated.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-int...ing-2017-1


This isn't going to sit well with people who don't like Presidents that lie.

Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

Perhaps not. It wasn't part of the intelligence report however so why is Trump saying that it had no influence on the election as if he got that information from the intel report?

LOL These guys are awesome.

(01-09-2017 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

Perhaps not. It wasn't part of the intelligence report however so why is Trump saying that it had no influence on the election as if he got that information from the intel report?

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC stuff cause you to not vote for Hillary??

(01-09-2017 12:44 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

Perhaps not. It wasn't part of the intelligence report however so why is Trump saying that it had no influence on the election as if he got that information from the intel report?

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC stuff cause you to not vote for Hillary??

Nope.

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC sutff cause anyone to not vote for Hillary?

I'm getting sick of running around reading these "ground breaking" reports and finding *zero* in the way of evidence...

On Putin - "We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election"

On Saddam - "Our community said with high confidence that Saddam was continuing and expanding his missile programs contrary to UN resolutions"

The CIA is not infallible... At least this time there is some circumstantial stuff but it's all "so and so knows Putin"

(01-09-2017 12:45 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:44 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

Perhaps not. It wasn't part of the intelligence report however so why is Trump saying that it had no influence on the election as if he got that information from the intel report?

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC stuff cause you to not vote for Hillary??

Nope.

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC sutff cause anyone to not vote for Hillary?

There you go - didn't convince you in the least. Zero influence.

Are you now insinuating that others of your leaning were stupid and easily duped?

(01-09-2017 01:03 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:45 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:44 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

Perhaps not. It wasn't part of the intelligence report however so why is Trump saying that it had no influence on the election as if he got that information from the intel report?

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC stuff cause you to not vote for Hillary??

Nope.

Question for you - did the possible Russian phishing of John Podesta or the DNC sutff cause anyone to not vote for Hillary?

There you go - didn't convince you in the least. Zero influence.

Are you now insinuating that others of your leaning were stupid and easily duped?

You haven't answered my question.

(01-09-2017 01:01 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  I'm getting sick of running around reading these "ground breaking" reports and finding *zero* in the way of evidence...

On Putin - "We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election"

On Saddam - "Our community said with high confidence that Saddam was continuing and expanding his missile programs contrary to UN resolutions"

The CIA is not infallible... At least this time there is some circumstantial stuff but it's all "so and so knows Putin"

And the people testifying said that they didn't change the election, so Donald was telling the truth.

(01-09-2017 12:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

Perhaps not. It wasn't part of the intelligence report however so why is Trump saying that it had no influence on the election as if he got that information from the intel report?

The DNC hack was not a national security risk nor top secret risk unlike Hillary's private server that likely was hacked, but Whose's fault is that. And She lost the election probably over that incompetent and arrogant decision.

(01-09-2017 01:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 01:01 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  I'm getting sick of running around reading these "ground breaking" reports and finding *zero* in the way of evidence...

On Putin - "We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election"

On Saddam - "Our community said with high confidence that Saddam was continuing and expanding his missile programs contrary to UN resolutions"

The CIA is not infallible... At least this time there is some circumstantial stuff but it's all "so and so knows Putin"

And the people testifying said that they didn't change the election, so Donald was telling the truth.

That's not what the report said. The report said that they didn't investigate whether or not it influenced the election.

Quit frankly, it isn't a matter of whether it did or didn't influence the election because common sense says that it did. Whether or not it was decisive is the question.

Personally, I don't think it was decisive. Trump would have won anyway. I don't think anyone with any common sense would say with a straight face that it didn't influence the election in some way.

There was no hacking of the election. No votes were altered.

At worst, Russians hacked the DNC and gave accurate documents to wikileaks which revealed the Democrats own corruption. That's not hacking an election. That's exposing a crooked candidate. That's being spun as Russia sought to "influence" the election. There is no evidence of this however. DNI presented no evidence whatsoever. Wiki leaks has said this was a leak and not a hack. I trust wiki leaks more than the lying CIA. This is Iraq has WMDs, trust us all over again.

The whole Russia hacked the election narrative is garbage.

UTTER NONSENSE

There is no evidence that votes were altered. This is true. However, the report did not investigate whether or not the influence was decisive.

Clearly there was influence because the MSM reported on it daily and Hillary and Trump commented on it regularly before the election.

Anyone who says it has no influence just has their head in the sand.

(01-09-2017 01:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  There is no evidence that votes were altered. This is true. However, the report did not investigate whether or not the influence was decisive.

Clearly there was influence because the MSM reported on it daily and Hillary and Trump commented on it regularly before the election.

Anyone who says it has no influence just has their head in the sand.

God forbid that people know the truth about someone they're voting for.

(01-09-2017 01:52 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 01:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  There is no evidence that votes were altered. This is true. However, the report did not investigate whether or not the influence was decisive.

Clearly there was influence because the MSM reported on it daily and Hillary and Trump commented on it regularly before the election.

Anyone who says it has no influence just has their head in the sand.

God forbid that people know the truth about someone they're voting for.

Yep, and that's the real reason the Dems are all bent out of shape. They knew they had a terrible candidate and the truth coming out was the last thing they needed. They didn't get upset at all the other hacks but this one was different, for a reason we all know too well.

The folks whining that Clinton lost the election because of the leaked emails always stop short of explaining why the emails could have had an affect. The leaked emails didn't affect the vote. The contents of the leaked emails may (or may not) have affected the vote.

But if they did, why?

Simple answer, the leaked emails presented a picture of a corrupt campaign.

And all the folks that are apoplectic over the leak, is any one of you concerned that the emails showed an organized effort between the DNC, Clinton camp and some members of the MSM to influence the election in favor of Hillary.

So much for an independent press.

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

When DJT actually goes after Russia, instead doing their bidding, maybe. But so long as he's slobbing Putin's knob....

No way.

(01-09-2017 02:50 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(01-09-2017 12:31 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Ugh, let it go man. The Russians more than likely interfered but they didn't change any votes, etc. Time to move on.

When DJT actually goes after Russia, instead doing their bidding, maybe. But so long as he's slobbing Putin's knob....

No way.

What bidding has he actually done?