Trump accuses Obama of inaction over Russia meddling claim

a reply to: carewemust

But why would Obama spread info showing that he was negligent?

What kind of negligence? What should Obama have done that he didn't do?

a reply to: carewemust
Maybe it was an admission that his and all Gvts are hamstrung about 'outside' interference ?

I hate to say it and point - unsubstantiated - fingers, but, i'm willing to bet money on Cambridge Analytica ..

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: carewemust

But why would Obama spread info showing that he was negligent?

What kind of negligence? What should Obama have done that he didn't do?

I'm not aware of the covert tools that Presidents have at their disposal. But presumably, "Do Nothing" is not one of them.

originally posted by: Damiel
a reply to: carewemust

I hate to say it and point - unsubstantiated - fingers, but, i'm willing to bet money on Cambridge Analytica ..

Interesting, re: Cambridge Analytica..

"The role and impact of the company's data analysis on those campaigns has been disputed and is the subject of ongoing criminal investigations in the United States and United Kingdom."

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: carewemust
yup

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: carewemust

DNC-WikiLeaks potentially saved the world.

Why don't we just turn the US over to Putin, then, since he's done so much good for us, and knows what's best for us.

Non sequitur....

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: carewemust

But why would Obama spread info showing that he was negligent?

What kind of negligence? What should Obama have done that he didn't do?

I'm not aware of the covert tools that Presidents have at their disposal. But presumably, "Do Nothing" is not one of them.

Right. "Do Nothing" IS NOT a tool that Obama actually used.

“There has been this theory we didn’t do anything, which I take issue with,” Monaco says in the interview, describing a decision by the administration—despite the extraordinary nature of a series of cyberattacks targeting the American political process itself—to treat the Russian intervention using the same law enforcement-focused approach it had in previous major hacks by “malicious” state actors.

“We treated it very much in the way that we have done other malicious activity by cyber actors,” Monaco says, choosing to turn the case over to the FBI and intelligence agencies to figure out how and when to “attribute” the attack publicly without giving away the evidence used to reach that conclusion. “We applied the same framework that we have in other contexts, whether it was China stealing intellectual property, whether it’s Iran committing denial of service attacks on our financial institutions, whether it’s North Korea in the Sony attack,” Monaco says. “We applied a framework and a playbook that we have done many times.”
www.politico.com...

a reply to: whywhynot

Words, and their meaning, matter.

originally posted by: Damiel
a reply to: carewemust
... i remember, at some point last year, Obama saying that the alphabet agencies should be carefull
carefull about releasing info that could influence the vote (i've been looking for threads for a timeline)

At that time,there was pizzagate, pussygrabgate, hillsmailservergate,gate-gategate...
All of which was - for me, at any rate - election tittletalk
no real substance and not hugely interesting

But for a sitiing Potus to tell the agencies to can it,
for fear of skewing the election made me think at the time
Clinton or Trump must have some very dirty laundry that no-one should hear about

Clinton's mails,Trump's dodgy business dealings


Now it makes a bit more sense
Russian tampering was known about,
as early as last summer

Think about it....

4 months from now, people are voting for the new CIC
You are the sitting CIC

What would happen if you came out saying 'the russians are interfering...'
imagine the #storm !!!!!!!!!!

Add to that, the sitting Senate majority leader coming out and saying any attempt to bring it up to the public will be met with intense political back lash and you have a recipe for damned if you do and damned if you dont.

a reply to: Pyle
Like, hell yeah !
seriously

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: whywhynot

Words, and their meaning, matter.

/ 5-ways you're accidentally condescending jerk online

www.makeuseof.com...

a reply to: Arnie123

From what I understand Russia tried to gain access to voter tallies but failed.

a reply to: windword

Okay..the "something" was figuring out how to make the attack known to the public. "Something that had been done many, many times before."

No mention of developing counter-measures against future attacks. Billions of tax-payer dollars to the FBI and Intelligence community for "public relations". No wonder we can't even covertly take-out Kim Jong.

Barack Obama received an “intelligence bombshell” from the CIA last August warning him that Russian president Vladimir Putin was directing a hacking campaign to tip the presidential election in Donald Trump’s favor

...

Trump tweeted on Thursday, “if Russia was working so hard on the 2016 election, it all took place during the Obama admin. Why didn’t they stop them?”

...
the Obama administration considered retaliatory options against Moscow including the release of intelligence that might embarrass Putin and planting “cyber weapons” in Russia’s infrastructure, but eventually settled on something less ambitious.

Link

How could the leader of any country,
in this day and age,
go around accusing another country
of skewing things....

That's like starting wars; no ?

a reply to: Damiel
Trump is right, Obama was weak in dealing with the issue.

originally posted by: why4what
a reply to: Damiel
Trump is right, Obama was weak in dealing with the issue.

Are you related to ATS member, "Phage"? You are direct to the point, just like him. (He's liberal-leaning though..)

Yea for trump and is stupid comments, so we started off with no russia did not do anything, to maybe they attempted something, to waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa its obamas fault.

a reply to: carewemust

No mention of developing counter-measures against future attacks.

Wrong. There were direct confrontations, sanctions, the shuttering of their Embassies compound, expulsions of the Russian Ambassadors and their Embassy staffs. Also, Obama authorized a new "cyber weapon" to use against them. He also made sure that the incriminating data that they discovered was widely distributed and saved from would be saboteurs.

a reply to: windword


Where do you see info about this new "cyber weapon" that the Obama Administration authorized?

Meddling is an ambiguous term. I can post on some random blog about how Hillary is this bad that bad, that's meddling in an election? No it's not. It's freedom of speech.