Charges Filed: Trump Campaign Russian Ties

[Asateo]

It's not because liberal parties have agreed to social health care, unemployment support etc. that it is not because of socialist parties that this became the fact. You speak of socialism and social democracy as two different things. Clearly marx had a different view then we have of socialism, but the one came forth from the other. Social democracy is a current interpretation of socialism. It's not because communism talked a lot about socialism that socialism becomes a problem. Many tyranic systems use differnt kind of legitimation (nazi's also called themselfs social f.e.)

Thus he seperation you try to make between socialism and social democracy seems incorrect to me. If social democracy exists, it is only because of socialism. Any faults or problems that existed with it have let to a new interpretation: social democracy (to make clear that no shift to communism is wanted).

The nordic countries have far better "support systems" for their citizens, which is basically what socialism is about these days...

[momuuu]

Wasn't the basic idea that socialists would strive to get to the marxist society through politics while communists would ultimately believe it'd be implemented through revolution?

[oats13]

It's not because liberal parties have agreed to social health care, unemployment support etc. that it is not because of socialist parties that this became the fact. You speak of socialism and social democracy as two different things. Clearly marx had a different view then we have of socialism, but the one came forth from the other. Social democracy is a current interpretation of socialism. It's not because communism talked a lot about socialism that socialism becomes a problem. Many tyranic systems use differnt kind of legitimation (nazi's also called themselfs social f.e.)

Thus he seperation you try to make between socialism and social democracy seems incorrect to me. If social democracy exists, it is only because of socialism. Any faults or problems that existed with it have let to a new interpretation: social democracy (to make clear that no shift to communism is wanted).

The nordic countries have far better "support systems" for their citizens, which is basically what socialism is about these days...

We are all going round in circles here because i'm afraid none of you seem to know what actual socialism is having literally never read any of it's central philosophers, if social democracy "came forth" from socialism then it by your own definition is a different thing- that is a tautological statement.

Look I can't make this any plainer- socialism is a 'thing'- a defined system of thought designed by marx and espoused as 'scientific' as opposed to the earlier utopian socialism of Fourier and Proudhon whom he attacked.

We here in Europe have been exposed to this and millions of people died and were put into poverty, due to this we are more sensitive to gradations of leftist political thought and recognise the difference between the two things- in America this largely isn't the case hence the confusion.

Within capitalism or social democracy some socialist institutions are allowed, a credit union is essentially such a thing as are 'lets' schemes ( localised currency) however within an entirely socialist state capitalist institutions are not allowed, at least not openly- hence the maxim 'in capitalism the rich become powerful and in communism the powerful become rich'.

Just look at the most successful countries in terms of where one might live through the lens of the income tax paradigm- it is pretty clear that success does not lie at the extremes of either notional parameter.

[momuuu]

I find it silly to say the ideas of marx and what happened in russia are entirely equivalent.

[n0el]

@oats13 i agree with your comments on socialism. however, you are the one that brought up that Trump is trying to get rid of it. Where exactly did you mean? I assumed that was targeted at "social democracy" in US but I guess I was wrong.

[oats13]

@oats13 i agree with your comments on socialism. however, you are the one that brought up that Trump is trying to get rid of it. Where exactly did you mean? I assumed that was targeted at "social democracy" in US but I guess I was wrong.

Well, Trump refers to Sanders as socialist/communist hence a particularly unpleasant quadratic conflation!, wether he has got that right domestically is a whole new topic and one not of great interest to me but I did in fact mention this within a global context in the original quote.

[Asateo]

You are right in your interpretation of Marx. Though lots of politicians refer to themselves as socialists. They don't mean the strict interpretation of Marx however. When people speak of socialism nowaday they don't think in Marx's terms. What is capitalism nowadays is something different then what Adam Smith envisioned.
It seems to me that we're comming from differnt places: static and dynamic interpretation...

[Papist]

Who can even say that a single voter was swung from this "meddeling"??

Do you really believe that incessant hacking and leaking of DNC documents, and the promulgation of fake news on Facebook didn't have an impact on the vote count?

How is this different than USA meddeling "everywhere" else?

It's not. Both are wrong.

The real "steal" was from Sanders, and now NY has admittet and appologyzed (after it went to cort) that they purged 200 000 votes, in Brocklyn only

The actual number is 100,000 and it was across NYC, not just in Brooklyn. Even if you assume all those votes would have gone to Sanders (which they would not have), Clinton still would have won the state handily.

I really wonder how many it was in USA as a whole? But we will never find out, cos this fact only came up after a lawsuite was filed. If a person gives his/her vote 2 times, it will be jailtime to serve. I wonder how many in DNC NY will serve Jail time???

Republicans cry voter fraud (with no evidence) when they lose too. It's really quite pathetic.

How about Clinton, when secretary of state, made arrangement for Russien companies to get hold of 20% of USA Uranium, while Clinton Foundation was generously donated to?? How about Bill Clinton having a meating with Putin in that same period when his wife was Secretary of State? Btw, Robert Mueler was a sentral figure in arranging that DEAL. He could possible get sacked over this now.

This reads like a Trump talking point. Here's an article from a fact-checker, debunking everything you just said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fac ... ef09389a1b

[Papist]

You are right in your interpretation of Marx. Though lots of politicians refer to themselves as socialists. They don't mean the strict interpretation of Marx however. When people speak of socialism nowaday they don't think in Marx's terms. What is capitalism nowadays is something different then what Adam Smith envisioned.
It seems to me that we're comming from differnt places: static and dynamic interpretation...

Socialism and Marxism are not the same thing; Marx did not come up with the idea of socialism. Likewise, Adam Smith did not come up with the idea of capitalism - I don't know where people get these strange ideas from.

[Asateo]

You are right in your interpretation of Marx. Though lots of politicians refer to themselves as socialists. They don't mean the strict interpretation of Marx however. When people speak of socialism nowaday they don't think in Marx's terms. What is capitalism nowadays is something different then what Adam Smith envisioned.
It seems to me that we're comming from differnt places: static and dynamic interpretation...

Socialism and Marxism are not the same thing; Marx did not come up with the idea of socialism. Likewise, Adam Smith did not come up with the idea of capitalism - I don't know where people get these strange ideas from.

Where do you read that I said one came from the other?
Marx and Smith are referential for socialism and capitalism... I never said they "came up" with it.

[oats13]

@Papist I really think you are confusing earlier utopian socialism with what we are talking about here which was already qualified as marxist 'scientific socialism' as for @Asateo I think that trying to refer to 'modern socialism' as equating to social democracy is 'problematic' to say the least, there are still people who want actual socialism or marxism and they might object for one xd.

[spanky4ever]

@Papist alright "only! 117 000 in Brocklyn, and 200 000 in total in NY!
The leaked email from DNC, where not false though, they showed the shenanigans that the DNC where pulling. But rather than focusing on this fact, the media, DNC and YOU, would rather call it a Russian Hack, just to pull focus away from what was actually in those files. There are just no evidence to support that Russians had anything to do with that.
About fake news on Facebook: I seriously doubt that had any inpact. I also know that the Clinton super pack payed online trolls - lots of them

phpBB [video]

https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... rvxhYpuM39

[Papist]

@Papist alright "only! 117 000 in Brocklyn, and 200 000 in total in NY!

Mind citing your source for this? You also still seem to be assuming that all those votes would have gone for Sanders, which is absurd.

The leaked email from DNC, where not false though, they showed the shenanigans that the DNC where pulling.

What was done was wrong, and those responsible have been held accountable. I don't know what more you want me to say.

But rather than focusing on this fact, the media, DNC and YOU, would rather call it a Russian Hack, just to pull focus away from what was actually in those files.

These are two separate issues. Was the DNC's covert support for Clinton despicable? Yes. Should the people responsible be fired? You bet. But that doesn't change the fact that Russian operatives hacked into a major political party's computer system with the intent of damaging a candidate.

There are just no evidence to support that Russians had anything to do with that.

This is just flat-out wrong.

About fake news on Facebook: I seriously doubt that had any inpact. I also know that the Clinton super pack payed online trolls - lots of them

You don't think an influx of hit pieces on Clinton had any impact on undecided voters? Also, an intelligence agency fabricating news stories is not the same thing as someone going online to defend a candidate they support, lmao.

[spanky4ever]

just for you @Papist https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... FMWAkXil_2
and https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... c5GOqQ-4j9

there are plenty of articles on this online, if you care to look.
If the election in NY was fair, YES I do think Sanders would and should have won. He is from Brocklyn, and I bet most of those votes would have gone in his favor. Maybe DNC also thought that, since they did this shenanigans trick?? You tell me Einstein.
We both know that you had to register in NY a whole year before the election. Think that was about the same time as Sanders announsed his candidacy and was made fun of my all the big news outlets. You might say that thats the way it is, and be satisfied with this?? prolly

You still say that there are evidence that Russia hacked the DNC server?? Well, maybe you should reveal your source? The only thing I have seen on this, is media spinn and pure speculations

[n0el]

You still say that there are evidence that Russia hacked the DNC server?? Well, maybe you should reveal your source? The only thing I have seen on this, is media spinn and pure speculations

This is confirmed by all US intelligence services...and btw I know several people personally who decided to not vote for Clinton because of the emails.

[JakeyBoyTH]

You still say that there are evidence that Russia hacked the DNC server?? Well, maybe you should reveal your source? The only thing I have seen on this, is media spinn and pure speculations

This is confirmed by all US intelligence services...and btw I know several people personally who decided to not vote for Clinton because of the emails.

It is all good to say that the US intelligence services confirm that there was Russian involvement, but I think there is still speculation. Until there is an independent party involved im not going to be convinced. In this day and age it is too easy to point fingers at where hacks come from - it is incredibly easy to spoof where you are on the internet. It has been confirmed for a while from WikiLeaks that the CIA has a department dedicated to planting evidence like this - evidence which isn't as strong as the media makes out to be. Putin has regarded this as almost laughable for some time which puts a lot of doubt in my mind about all of this nonsense (but he would try and shrug it off).

There is of course no doubt that both countries (Russia and US) try to gather as much information from each other by any means necessary, so of course hacking, but the potential for fake evidence is just too high on this one to really justify accusing anyone unless on a basis of guilty plea.

This is of course not saying there was no Russian involvement in the elections (Which Assange suggests) but there is very much some doubt in my mind about the whole thing. It seems very convenient for the DNC - even to have an inquiry. The whole situation is very stinky indeed.

[spanky4ever]

You still say that there are evidence that Russia hacked the DNC server?? Well, maybe you should reveal your source? The only thing I have seen on this, is media spinn and pure speculations

This is confirmed by all US intelligence services...and btw I know several people personally who decided to not vote for Clinton because of the emails.

Yes, the leaked emails where quite telling I guess They still have not revealed any proof to my knowlegde.
https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... ipFQaWAmMh

To this day, however, the intelligence agencies that released this assessment have failed to provide the American people with any actual evidence substantiating their claims about how the DNC material was obtained or by whom. Astonishingly and often overlooked, the authors of the declassified ICA themselves admit that their “judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact.”

https://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... us52zgSnJ3

[n0el]

In June 2016, The Washington Post reported that the Democratic National Committee’s computer network had been hacked, allowing access to email and chat transcripts, as well as files detailing research on GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.

This was reported about a month before the hacked files were released, shortly before the Democratic convention began. As The Post reported at the time, the likely culprits had already been identified as Russian — not by the government but by an outside firm called CrowdStrike.

The firm identified two separate hacker groups, both working for the Russian government, that had infiltrated the network, said Dmitri Alperovitch, CrowdStrike co-founder and chief technology officer. The firm had analyzed other breaches by both groups over the past two years.

One group, which CrowdStrike had dubbed Cozy Bear, had gained access last summer and was monitoring the DNC’s email and chat communications, Alperovitch said.

The other, which the firm had named Fancy Bear, broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files. It was this breach that set off the alarm. The hackers stole two files, Henry said. And they had access to the computers of the entire research staff — an average of about several dozen on any given day.

That report was bolstered by other evidence. As the blog Motherboard reported, the additional evidence pointing to Russia includes:

Analysis of DNC log files by two CrowdStrike competitors that reached the same conclusion based on the reuse of tools known to be linked to Russian hackers.
The registration of a domain intended to trick DNC employees that pointed back to an Internet address that had been used in previous hacks.
The accidental inclusion of Russian-language metadata in some of the leaked files, as well as some error messages that were printed in Russian. In later releases of the same files, those messages were removed.
The fact that the leaker of the DNC documents, Guccifer 2.0, claimed to be Romanian but didn’t speak that language.

[spanky4ever]

how clumcy to leave Russian langu in the metadata? Those Russians must be stupid? And this was revealed by a private firm? Guess the fact that the Clinton campaign didnt want let FBI take a look at the presumed hacked server, when FBI wanted to assist them? leaves us with "evidence" by an outside private firma.

[Jam]

Russia won the meme war! 2D CHESS! Putin Putin Putin!

[JakeyBoyTH]

"Recall, for example, that cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike conveniently concluded within one day that the Russian government was behind the attack on the DNC servers. I say conveniently, because the DNC paid for CrowdStrike’s services — and it’s fair to say the DNC had an unhealthy fixation on all things Russia for the duration of the election cycle.
The evidence provided by CrowdStrike included the fact that malware found on DNC servers was the same as malware believed to be used by Russian intelligence units, that metadata files included information in Cyrillic text, and that emails had been sent using the Russian email service Yandex. In other words, it was nothing the CIA couldn’t have done itself in order to “misdirect attribution.” What’s more, CrowdStrike actually admitted that it deliberately left out evidence that didn’t support its claims that Russia was responsible.
FireEye, a competitor of CrowdStrike, made similar claims on thin evidence. The hackers, they explained, “appeared to cease operations on Russian holidays, and their work hours seem to align with the UTC +3 time zone, which contains cities such as Moscow and St. Petersburg.”"



CrowdStrike is paid for by the DNC - Big Suprise lol. This information is from WikiLeaks.

[EDIT] The clumsyness really takes the cake. To pretend that Russian Hackers are worse than American is ridiculous. They both have very similar skill set.

[n0el]

You do realize that Wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool, right?

[JakeyBoyTH]

You do realize that Wikileaks is a Russian propaganda tool, right?

Ofc it would be portrayed that way.

[n0el]

“WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service.

“It has encouraged its followers to find jobs at CIA in order to obtain intelligence. It directed Chelsea Manning in her theft of specific secret information. And it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States, while seeking support from anti-democratic countries and organisations.

“It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.”

That is said by none other than Mike Pompeo, one of Trump's staunchest supporters and conservative prick by all accounts.

[JakeyBoyTH]

“WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service.

“It has encouraged its followers to find jobs at CIA in order to obtain intelligence. It directed Chelsea Manning in her theft of specific secret information. And it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States, while seeking support from anti-democratic countries and organisations.

“It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.”

That is said by none other than Mike Pompeo, one of Trump's staunchest supporters and conservative prick by all accounts.

He must be a very trustworthy source then. Sounds like a decent guy. We will see how this plays out anyway.