Ricochet Member FeedLiked by R> MembersLiked13 likes
  1. Larry Koler
  2. Gary McVey
  3. Phil Turmel
  4. WI Con
  5. MCH
  6. MarciN
  7. Stina
  8. Dave Sussman
  9. Songwriter
  10. Brian Wolf
  11. Randy Weivoda
  12. M1919A4
  13. JLock
The post I agree with Jonah G. about the Russian election hack was written by Ricochet member MJBubba and recommended by members to be considered by an editor for promotion to the Main Feed. Any member can write posts on the Member Feed. Become a member to get your posts published on the home page as well.

Members have made 49 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  1. Profile photo of Herbert Member

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    • #2
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:10 pm
  2. Profile photo of DocJay Member

    Nice article. I’m sure Trump gets it.

    • #3
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:17 pm
  3. Profile photo of JR Bohl Member

    I also listen to NPR on a regular basis and Jonah G. is on semi-regularly. They had him on many times during the campaign season, opposite Cokie Roberts at least twice as memory serves. He is an excellent representative of what once was the #NeverTrump cohort of the Conservative movement. Unless Cons are ready to start a new party on January 21st (I’m ready, fwiw), we would do well to pay attention to the folks at NR as regards strategies for remaining the “loyal opposition” within the GOP.

    • #4
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:18 pm
  4. Profile photo of Tzvi Kilov Member

    Interesting idea. The problem is that either way it seems to be a matter of pure speculation.

    One thing that strikes me as crazy is the omnipotence and omniscience ascribed to Putin. I understand that the KGB is gigantic but predicting the future, and altering it, is no simple thing even for vast resources.

    If Putin were prudent and practical, the goal would be to hurt who you think is going to win, but not in such a way that it precludes controlling or hurting the one who’s going to lose. Smart people plan with layers of contingencies so that no matter which of the ten most likely things to happen take place, you are still in a somewhat advantageous position. This is why this doesn’t seem so crazy.

    In short, it’s all speculation, and the question is: Is Putin wise?

    • #5
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:22 pm
  5. Profile photo of Johnny Dubya Member

    There are some parallels with the Iraq War.

    Everyone agrees that Saddam Hussein has WMD. We invade Iraq. Few WMD are found. Progressives decide that there’s only one logical explanation: Bush knew there were no WMD, and so there was a conspiracy to “lie” us into war.

    Everyone agrees that Hillary Rodham will win the election. Election day comes. Trump wins. Progressives decide that there’s only one logical explanation: Russia wanted Trump to win, and so there was a conspiracy to “hack” the election.

    Conspiracy theories are a form of superstition, and I would argue that such thinking is more prevalent on the left. If I’m not mistaken, there are polls showing that a majority of Democrats (“The Party of Science”) believe that the election results were hacked.

    • #6
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:24 pm
  6. Profile photo of Hoyacon Member

    I agree with this idea and have seen it floated by others. The first duty of anyone opining on this for mass consumption, however, is to question the lack of concrete evidence put forth supporting the Russian hacking. The second duty is to point out that no one has questioned the truth of the revelations. Speculation as to motives if it happened comes in third.

    • #7
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:29 pm
  7. Profile photo of Bob Thompson Member

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    I have been searching for validation of your statement that Trump doesn’t get that ‘Russia is not our friend’. Can you help so I don’t have to spend so much time trying to find this.

    • #8
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:34 pm
  8. Profile photo of Herbert Member

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    DocJay (View Comment):
    Nice article. I’m sure Trump gets it.

    If he got it, why accept J Assange’s account over that of your intelligence agencies?

    • #9
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:34 pm
  9. Profile photo of Herbert Member

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    I have been searching for validation of your statement that Trump doesn’t get that ‘Russia is not our friend’. Can you help so I don’t have to spend so much time trying to find this.

    here’s a start…

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/28/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-quotes/

    • #10
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:39 pm
  10. Profile photo of Bob Thompson Member

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    DocJay (View Comment):
    Nice article. I’m sure Trump gets it.

    If he got it, why accept J Assange’s account over that of your intelligence agencies?

    Are you referring to information that could have been acquired independently by the two sources? Perhaps Trump is just showing that the security of data by the DNC was so weak that Assange got from a leak the same as the Russians got by hacking or phishing.

    • #11
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:40 pm
  11. Profile photo of DocJay Member

    • #12
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:47 pm
  12. Profile photo of blood thirsty neocon Member

    Tzvi Kilov (View Comment):
    Interesting idea. The problem is that either way it seems to be a matter of pure speculation.

    One thing that strikes me as crazy is the omnipotence and omniscience ascribed to Putin. I understand that the KGB is gigantic but predicting the future, and altering it, is no simple thing even for vast resources.

    Exactly, I’m very impressed at how Putin manipulated the American media/pollster complex in such a way as to suppress Democratic voter turnout and make Hillary think the Rust Belt was solid blue, keeping her from setting foot in Michigan and Wisconsin. Also, planting the private server in her basement was genius!

    • #13
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:52 pm
  13. Profile photo of Ryan M(cPherson) Coolidge

    He’s right.

    But that’s not why the left is talking about Russia.

    The Russians would not need to actually believe that Trump could win in order for them to “hack the election.” While it is certainly more convenient for the left to set up this narrative that Trump is a Russian plant, their primary reason for blaming the Russians may just as well be to detract from the fact that Hillary lost. In other words, regardless of the Russians’ motives, they did in fact influence the outcome of the election. It wasn’t a rejection of Obama or of leftist policy, it wasn’t even a majority of Americans (she won the popular vote, remember?); rather, the American people were cheated.

    This is fine for us. Let them convince themselves that “business as usual” is a great idea. One thing to be said for conservatives, even people who didn’t support Trump have learned important lessons from this election. If the left refuses to do that, so much the worse for them.

    • #14
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:53 pm
  14. Profile photo of Bob Thompson Member

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    I have been searching for validation of your statement that Trump doesn’t get that ‘Russia is not our friend’. Can you help so I don’t have to spend so much time trying to find this.

    here’s a start…

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/28/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-quotes/

    All of what you provided came before Trump was the Republican nominee. The last item from 7/28/2016 after he was the presumptive nominee: ‘”I would treat Vladimir Putin firmly, but there’s nothing I can think of that I’d rather do than have Russia friendly, as opposed to the way they are right now, so that we can go and knock out ISIS with other people,” Trump said at a news conference.’

    This says he would rather Russia be friendly but they are not now. How does he not get that if he actually says it?

    • #15
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:54 pm
  15. Profile photo of Ryan M(cPherson) Coolidge

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    I have been searching for validation of your statement that Trump doesn’t get that ‘Russia is not our friend’. Can you help so I don’t have to spend so much time trying to find this.

    We’re seeing that it is pretty difficult to know exactly what Trump gets and what he doesn’t. But his statements (in addition to Hannity’s interview with Assange) do tend to support Herbert’s suspicion.

    What I’ll say is this. Trump will be briefed, and regardless of what he says on twitter or on television, I hope that he places a lot of faith in the people doing the briefing. He has surrounded himself, thus far, with some really good people.

    • #16
    • January 9, 2017 at 3:55 pm
  16. Profile photo of DocJay Member

    One thing it seems that Trump gets ( or uses as an excuse to deflect a question) is that you don’t tell your enemies what you know, what you think, or especially what your plans are.

    Does anyone in their right mind think that Gen Flynn or Gen Mattis or Gen Kelly or Mike Pompeo would tolerate ( without major response) a KGB commie strongman manipulating their upcoming administration? Of course not, a person would have to be delusional to think that.

    • #17
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:08 pm
  17. Profile photo of TKC1101 Inactive

    Herbert (View Comment):
    If he got it, why accept J Assange’s account over that of your intelligence agencies?

    Based on past performance of Clapper on telling the truth at hearings, I would accept almost anyone over him in veracity. I am surprised at all the people who view him now as some paragon of credibility.

    • #18
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:17 pm
  18. Profile photo of Gumby Mark Member

    The text (as opposed to the media coverage) of the intelligence report released a few days ago supports the Goldberg thesis. The report states:

    “When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency.”

    This verbiage is repeated twice elsewhere in the report. At no point in the report does it state that Moscow expected Trump to win. There are a couple of references to the intelligence community assessment that Putin developed a clear preference for Trump over Clinton, but no statement that he actually expected Trump to win. My guess is they were as surprised as everyone else (except @mikelaroche!).

    • #19
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:30 pm
  19. Profile photo of Bob Thompson Member

    Ryan M(cPherson) (View Comment):
    What I’ll say is this. Trump will be briefed, and regardless of what he says on twitter or on television, I hope that he places a lot of faith in the people doing the briefing. He has surrounded himself, thus far, with some really good people.

    When Trump is POTUS we can get a better picture of how he is dealing with intelligence issues. It seems very reasonable to me to have some reservations when dealing only with intelligence officials in place within the Obama Administration. IRS and the Justice Department, two law enforcement agencies that should act with political impartiality, have not for eight years. That can cause anyone to be a skeptic.

    • #20
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:33 pm
  20. Profile photo of Ryan M(cPherson) Coolidge

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Ryan M(cPherson) (View Comment):
    What I’ll say is this. Trump will be briefed, and regardless of what he says on twitter or on television, I hope that he places a lot of faith in the people doing the briefing. He has surrounded himself, thus far, with some really good people.

    When Trump is POTUS we can get a better picture of how he is dealing with intelligence issues. It seems very reasonable to me to have some reservations when dealing only with intelligence officials in place within the Obama Administration. IRS and the Justice Department, two law enforcement agencies that should act with political impartiality, have not for eight years. That can cause anyone to be a skeptic.

    Agreed.

    • #21
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:42 pm
  21. Profile photo of Herbert Member

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    MJBubba:The Russians are not our friends, and they are not friends of Trump. They are to be watched very carefully.

    I pretty much agree with all of what you wrote above except this needs further clarification. Trump doesn’t get this…

    DocJay (View Comment):
    Nice article. I’m sure Trump gets it.

    If he got it, why accept J Assange’s account over that of your intelligence agencies?

    Are you referring to information that could have been acquired independently by the two sources? Perhaps Trump is just showing that the security of data by the DNC was so weak that Assange got from a leak the same as the Russians got by hacking or phishing.

    Perhaps so, or maybe we should start taking Kelly Ann’s admonition to heart…. don’t listen to what Trump actually says(…the soon to be leader of the free world)…. just figure out what’s in his heart.

    • #22
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:53 pm
  22. Profile photo of MJBubba Member
    MJBubba Post author

    Johnny Dubya (View Comment):
    There are some parallels with the Iraq War.

    Everyone agrees that Saddam Hussein has WMD. We invade Iraq. Few WMD are found. Progressives decide that there’s only one logical explanation: Bush knew there were no WMD, and so there was a conspiracy to “lie” us into war.

    ...

    Thanks very much for this. I had thought of this as a parallel, also.

    Our Intelligence guys were listening in on conversations in a couple of Saddam’ palaces. Saddam and his top generals thought they had WMDs plus more in development. We also learned that the intelligence guys in Russia had picked up the same info from their listening activities. British, French and Israeli intelligence contacts confirmed our requests for verification; they all had the same idea.

    It turned out that Iraq had a lot less WMDs than what Saddam and his inner circle had thought they had. (Their own military scientists had been lying to their bosses.)

    Likewise, Russia knew that our media, our polls, and insiders at both the RNC and DNC all had the firm conviction that Hillary would win. There was no reason to second-guess such well-provenance intelligence.

    By the grace of G-d, everyone was wrong in both instances.

    • #23
    • January 9, 2017 at 4:54 pm
  23. Profile photo of I Walton Member

    We keep saying according to US intelligence sources, but they are all Obama appointees. So we should say according to Obama political appointees… Everyone thought Hillary was going to win. Did Putin have inside information about American voter intentions? The whole narrative could only be believed by Democrats and the sort of Republicans they find easy to manipulate thorough fear of the media, like McCain and Graham. I’m almost as anxious to see them retire as I am to see Obama vanish.

    • #24
    • January 9, 2017 at 5:29 pm
  24. Profile photo of Herbert Member

    I Walton (View Comment):
    We keep saying according to US intelligence sources, but they are all Obama appointees. So we should say according to Obama political appointees…

    Most of the intelligence agencies are staffed with career appointees…

    • #25
    • January 9, 2017 at 5:43 pm
  25. Profile photo of Bob Thompson Member

    Herbert (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):
    We keep saying according to US intelligence sources, but they are all Obama appointees. So we should say according to Obama political appointees…

    Most of the intelligence agencies are staffed with career appointees…

    What is a career appointee?

    • #26
    • January 9, 2017 at 5:54 pm
  26. Profile photo of Rodin Member

    The rule of thumb is that everyone is playing us: Obama, Clapper, Putin, Assange. I believe Goldberg is right because….I had already thought it.

    • #27
    • January 9, 2017 at 5:57 pm
  27. Profile photo of I Walton Member

    Herbert (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):
    We keep saying according to US intelligence sources, but they are all Obama appointees. So we should say according to Obama political appointees…

    Most of the intelligence agencies are staffed with career appointees…

    Some are former career officers but they are all political appointees. The agency is political because it has to be.

    • #28
    • January 9, 2017 at 6:01 pm
  28. Profile photo of big spaniel Member

    What I’ll say is this. Trump will be briefed, and regardless of what he says on twitter or on television, I hope that he places a lot of faith in the people doing the briefing. He has surrounded himself, thus far, with some really good people.

    It’s clear that he doesn’t have any faith in the people doing the briefing. Which is scary.

    • #29
    • January 9, 2017 at 6:01 pm
  29. Profile photo of big spaniel Member

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Herbert (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):
    We keep saying according to US intelligence sources, but they are all Obama appointees. So we should say according to Obama political appointees…

    Most of the intelligence agencies are staffed with career appointees…

    What is a career appointee?

    Better said, the vast majority of the intelligence agencies are staffed with career professionals, who have vast amounts of education, training and experience. I’m not aware of any political appointees at CIA except for the very top. At State’s intelligence arm, they are all career Foreign Service or Civil Service.

    • #30
    • January 9, 2017 at 6:05 pm
  1. 1
  2. 2