obama’s intelligence heads offered up a report on the Russian hacking scandal. The report, which experts called “underwhelming”, revealed little new information or it did, depending on which side of the aisle you sit. There is no question that this entire story is being ginned up by democrats solely for political purposes.
What did we get out of this report?
- The Russians had an axe to grind with hillary clinton for her having meddled in their elections:
Their rocky relationships goes back to her tenure as secretary of state and as senator. At one point she accused his party of rigging an election, and Putin accused her of inciting protests against his government. Even Clinton herself has attributed a grudge toward her as the motivation for the Russian hacks.
Meddle she did:
As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov looked on, Clinton told the group the United States had “serious concern about the conduct of the elections,” and called for a “full investigation” of all reports of fraud and intimidation.”
“The Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve the right to have their voices heard and their votes counted,” Clinton said. “And that means they deserve free, fair, transparent elections and leaders who are accountable to them.”
further:
“When authorities fail to prosecute those who attack people for exercising their rights or exposing abuses, they subvert justice and undermine the people’s confidence in their governments,” Clinton said. “As the Duma elections in Russia clearly demonstrate, elections that are neither free nor fair have the same effect,” Clinton said.
And you know what they say about payback:
“Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime . . . and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him,” the report said.
- It wasn’t about getting Trump elected:
“Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.”
This didn’t stop the NY Times from misrepresenting the report to make Trump look bad:
No, it was aimed at discrediting her.
The Russians were engaged in actions at least as far back as 2015- before Trump was the GOP candidate.
- No vote tallies were altered
“They did not change any vote tallies or anything of that sort,” Clapper said under questioning from Chairman John McCain (R.-Ariz.)
- There’s no evidence any propaganda changed anyone’s minds
I know no one who knows anyone who knows anyone who knows anyone whose vote was changed because of whatever information is supposed to have come from the Russians. Moreover:
Clapper further implicitly conceded that whatever the Russians might have done in making Democratic National Committee emails available to the public, the outcome of the U.S. presidential election nonetheless reflected “the choices” of American voters.
Even the hacks at Politifact agree:
Based on the evidence, it seems highly unlikely that actions by the Russian government contributed in any decisive way to Trump’s win over Clinton.
Let us not forget that the emails became available because John Podesta handed over the password to his account. He got hooked in a phishing trip. Additionally, let us note that none of the Podesta emails were forged. They accurately depicted the chicanery and dishonesty of the clinton campaign.
So the Russian efforts were about undermining hillary, but that really isn’t what should be bothering you. What should be bothering you is why obama allowed it to happen and allow it to go on he did.
In 2014 the Russian hacked the White House computers which were down for “weeks.” It was met by silence from the administraition:
Why the coy silence? Because it was October 2014, weeks before the midterm elections, and the story reflected poorly on the Obama administration, which didn’t even discover the intrusion itself. It turned out that American officials were alerted to the Russian hack of the White House and State Department by an unidentified ally (I’m guessing Israel).
The obama administration has known about Russian hacking since at least 2015.
WASHINGTON — When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its computer network, he was transferred, naturally, to the help desk.
His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C. had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named “the Dukes,” a cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.
The F.B.I. knew it well: The bureau had spent the last few years trying to kick the Dukes out of the unclassified email systems of the White House, the State Department and even the Joint Chiefs of Staff, one of the government’s best-protected networks.
The DNC did not take it seriously:
Yared Tamene, the tech-support contractor at the D.N.C. who fielded the call, was no expert in cyberattacks. His first moves were to check Google for “the Dukes” and conduct a cursory search of the D.N.C. computer system logs to look for hints of such a cyberintrusion. By his own account, he did not look too hard even after Special Agent Hawkins called back repeatedly over the next several weeks — in part because he wasn’t certain the caller was a real F.B.I. agent and not an impostor.
Here’s the bottom line to all of this-despite knowing obama did NOTHING
Mr. Obama was briefed regularly on all this, but he made a decision that many in the White House now regret: He did not name Russians publicly, or issue sanctions. There was always a reason: fear of escalating a cyberwar, and concern that the United States needed Russia’s cooperation in negotiations over Syria.
“We’d have all these circular meetings,” one senior State Department official said, “in which everyone agreed you had to push back at the Russians and push back hard. But it didn’t happen.”
So the Russians escalated again — breaking into systems not just for espionage, but to publish or broadcast what they found, known as “doxing” in the cyberworld.
It is amusing that democrats routinely berate Trump as being Putin’s pal when it is obama who has been Putin’s b*tch for the last eight years. Never mind that obama has interfered in elections both in the UK and in Israel. In 2012 obama promised to be more “flexible” for “Vlad” and since then he has taken it up the wazoo for Putin.
obama didn’t react to any of Russia’s actions- whether it was the Ukraine, Crimea, buzzing ships and aircraft, or hacking US assets. Now he musters a half-assed response after an election he fully expected to go for clinton and only because she lost and he needs badly to save face. Had she won, this would not even be a story the media would care about. obama has done nothing but project weakness around the world and has emboldened these actions against us.
THAT is what should be irritating you.
So you’ll have to forgive some of us if we don’t share your outrage about this now. Some of us were outraged long ago and you should have been too.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
I only know of ONE dem who even said all the DNC email info made an impact on her.
And she went from TEPID for Hillary to not bothering to go out and vote.
Not even sure that was the real reason.
She’s pretty flaky.
Where was the outrage by Obama, the Democrats and their Republican als like McCain and Miss Lindsey when the Chinese hacked the federal employee database and are frequently caught stealing our military secrets?
Hillary hanging State Department classified information out in public didn’t bother them. The Chinese hacking the personal information of government employees didn’t bother them. Even the DNC being hacked didn’t bother them. The only thing that bothered them was losing an election they were GUARANTEED to win. NOW this is an issue, or rather, an excuse.
I will check in occasionally to read the fantasies of DrJohn.
They are quite amusing and telling with their infantile images.
I am reminded of William Shockley.
@Bill… Deplorable Me:
hanging in public?
I must have missed the Wikileaks from Clinton’s “hacked” email server.
@PhillipMarlowe: The Russians were obviously saving Hillary’s e-mails for a better blackmail opportunity.
Good article, Dr. J. Really disgusting pic.
The DNC sabotaging of Bernie’s candidacy did not affect the election.
The DNC giving the debate questions to Hillary in advance did not affect the election.
The DNC organizing riots at Trump rallies (and then blaming the violence on Trump) did not affect the election.
The election was only affected when these corrupt DNC dirty tricks were exposed to the public.
This is the alternate reality of leftists.
@PhillipMarlowe:
Yes, you must have.
@Angel Artiste:
So true. When they realized they would have to be looking at Hillary’s cackling face every day, it destroyed her base
You got it right Angel
@RedTeam: no reddy , I did not miss them. There were no emails released from the “hacked” server.
Clicking your heels three times and wishing for it does not make it true.
This is a non-issue.
Of course Russia is trying to get access to our secure systems. So is Israel. So is Germany. France. Great Britain.
Just as we’re doing it to everyone else. Friends, enemies and in-betweens. It’s what nations do and have always done.
Nothing new, nothing worthy of outrage, outside of the people who make it easy *cough Podesta* *cough Hillary*
@Petercat: *cough*RNC. Except, for some reason, Julian Assange didn’t release those.
Hmmm
@PhillipMarlowe: “He’s Not A Bad Man, Just A Funny Bugger,” She Said
@PhillipMarlowe:
Is it a fantasy that Obama had knowledge of various nations hacking government systems for years but only now reacted?
I didn’t say that, did I? Apparently you did miss where Hillary, in an attempt to illegally avoid FOIA requests, set up an unsecured, secret (to everyone but hackers such as Guccifer) private email server which she illegally kept classified State Department information and which the FBI said almost certainly was hacked. Perhaps you should have given someone instructions to wake you up every so often.
@Bill… Deplorable Me: This is what you typed Bill:
I take that to mean that you think her emails were released to the public.
@PhillipMarlowe:
Perhaps, just perhaps, the Republicans ran a clean campaign. I’m sure that is an alien concept to a leftist. The DNC ran the dirtiest of campaigns possible, and yet no one on the left has raised an objection. Is there any doubt that the left is composed of corrupt hypocrites?
Actually, Assange received several RNC emails (which he released), but there was nothing of interest in them. A clean campaign, perhaps? They also had better security, which only makes sense. Only irresponsible idiots would be so dense as to use private servers for official business, fall for stupid “spear-phishing” schemes, and use the word “password” for their password.
These are your people, Marlowe. You own them, and you are one of them. Hopefully, Trump will wipe the slate clean of these corrupt, incompetent idiots that have infected our government..
@PhillipMarlowe:
Your failure is your problem, I’m not going to bail you out. Philly….
@PhillipMarlowe:
*cough*, RNC had better security on their servers. So it wasn’t ‘some’ reason, it was ‘the’ reason. *cough*
@PhillipMarlowe:
You certainly may think whatever you like, though you’d probably be wrong, as usual. Hanging them out where they are available is not the same as ‘releasing them to the public’. Surely you don’t deny they were available… do you?
@Angel Artiste: Very nasty Angel.
Perhaps Balrog would be a better nom de plume.
If you read the DNC emails (and I’ll wager you did not) you would know that they are not the dirtiest of campaigns. Typical stuff. I’d wager they parallel what the RNC was emailing about Trump during the primaries. Trump’s VA guy, Cory Stewart, seem to think so.
But that bit of history has been swept into the dustbin by the “rightists” and “alt-rightists”.
@RedTeam:
In other words, RT is too lazy to copy and paste a non-existent link.
@RedTeam:
The old “when did you stop beating your spouse” gambit to cover oneself.
I do deny that her SOS emails are available. I’m sure Julian and Gucifer 2.0 would have made them so. You certainly don’t know where to find them. If you could, you would have posted a link…
As for there RNC having better security, the report that was released on Friday didn’t make that claim.
As noted with Balrog, RNC emails from primary time would be quite embarrassing to the RNC.
Since no one expected Trump to actually win outside a few election insiders within the US, wouldn’t a better conclusion be that the Russians were seeking to weaken a future President Hillary Clinton?
*The report contains no evidence or conclusion regarding Podesta’s emails.
This is a 13 page report.
*The first five pages are generalizations and assumption with references to Soviet activities during the cold war.
*The report said that Putin considered Trump to be a more effective leader against terrorists and ISIS.
*Therefore, the report says, Putin wanted Trump to win. The report references a few other Russians who supposedly said they wanted Trump to win.
*The next 7 pages discusses the Russian media company RT. They reference articles in RT about Clinton’s corruption, Clinton’s health and the Clinton foundation.
*Then there is one page titled “Estimative Language” which talks about terms such as probable and likely etc.
*The report proves absolutely nothing. It provides no useful information.
?oh=b1c21795b053b1d96a916f45c6b62957&oe=58DBA70B
Updated Saturday, January 7th: Russian official: ‘Republicans trust Putin more than the Democrats’
Memo to Donald Trump: You’re going to be president, in part, because Vladimir Putin wanted you to be president. They didn’t hack voting machines; they hacked Democratic Party targets and released the information at calculated intervals through Wikileaks and dcleaks.com to manipulate voter perceptions. They may have also hacked your corporate computers, which are not protected by impenetrable magical wards. If so, whatever they got could be used against you. They would be saving that for use when it’s needed.
Memo to the political right: You are not smarter than our combined national intelligence community. You are not seeing all of what they know, because much of that remains classified.
@Greg: #24
Bullshit
Here is what greg and the lunatic left would have us believe; Putin and the Russians did all of the following:
1) Convinced John Podesta to use password for an email password and send thousands of incriminating emails about Hillary using an insecure server?
2) The Russians convinced Hillary to illegally use and unsecure server and send classified documents on it?
3) Convinced Sheryl Mills to copy Hilary on debate questions from CNN?
4) Arranged for Huma Abedin to marry Johny Dangerous so he would be caught as a pedophile and the NYPD would investigate his computers and find all kinds of classified emails incriminating Hillary?
5) Convince the head of the FBI to reopen a Congressional investigation of classified material from Hillary sent illegally and compromised national security before the election as planned using the FBI?
6) The Russians convinced all the American people to vote for Trump when Obama and the entire mainstream media 24 hours a day were lying about Trump and spreading false information?
7) Boy the Russians are good and all of our intelligence services new about this and did nothing and waited for Trump to win before telling anyone about it and never actually looked at the DNC servers, never shut down wikileeks, and never extradited and arrested Julian Assange?
What you should believe is what our own nation’s intelligence community is telling us. Julian Assange and Vladimir Putin are not reliable sources of information. Their motives are not in our own nation’s best interests.
Why do you find this so difficult to believe? Are you under the impression that the intelligence community is slavishly devoted to Barack Obama, or to Hillary Clinton?
@Greg: #26
That is exactly what blind lemmings do.
They are lying you fool. They are politically motivated like every agency in this deplorable administration.
But hey, believe what you want, thanks for playing along….
@PhillipMarlowe:
Well, I guess you can take it however you want. What it means, though, is that she incompetently handled the information she intentionally and illegally placed on her unsecured server, making it available to anyone that would choose to try and look at it. While the FBI confirms it was most definitely invaded by up to 4 foreign actors, we cannot be sure and have to regard everything she had on it as compromised.
Maybe you can understand that. Nod your head up and down if you can.
Maybe the RNC put safeguards in place. See, the RNC is used to having an opposition that will employ every dirty tactic against them, so it is important to put protective measures in place. Also, since the Democrats use dirty tactics, they should have been aware dirty tactics might be used against them, but most of what we see from Democrats is arrogance and elitism and, apparently, they assumed no one else was smart enough to try.
Plus, the RNC did not go out and try to disrupt the elections of other countries, as Hillary and Obama did, so they had little to fear from outside influences. Democrats assume they are so superior to everyone else, yet they repeatedly prove they are way down the evolutionary chain. Phillip.
@Greg: There are a LOT of people more trustworthy than the Democrats. And, that IS a sad, pitiful reality.
No, what you are telling us is to believe what a few LEADERS of the intelligence community are telling us and, as I have shown, these very people have been lying, at the behest of Lord Obama, to make Obama’s foreign policy appear less a disaster than it is. They could be giving us the actual facts, but Obama has caused such damage to their credibility that taking their word without question is supremely risky. I hope Trump can restore this trust, for I do want to have faith in my government.
Odd that Hillary would go through that embarrassing episode of the misspelled “Reset” button, then go forth and try to discredit the Russian election. Is that statesmanship?
Back in 2013 Dems were polled about their trust in gov’t intel agencies.
ALL Dems: 28% trusted them.
Conserv Dems 27% trusted them.
Moderate Dems 27% trusted them.
Liberal Dems 28% trusted them.
Pew poll.
Funny how, now that Obama is telling them to, Dems are jumping up their blind support of whatever these same intel agencies tell them.
@PhillipMarlowe: Failure to secure classified information is hanging it out for a middle schooled kid to hack. You are just what we need here, another troll.
@Randy: randy, it wasn’t hacked. Considering the network of Apple employees hasn’t been hacked by Chinese or anyone else as was the US government, maybe some do a better job than the government.
Isn’t that the main belief of conservatives, or atleast those on this site.
Logic and deductive reasoning.
@Bill… Deplorable Me: Obama and Clinton interfered in Russian election.
Yo, they were leading the government. Just as the US did in post war Europe and Greece, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, South and Central America.
This is becoming even more amusing to see the Obama Derangment System led to hose to loving Putin, invader of Ukraine, killer of opponents and enemy of Pussy Riot.
@PhillipMarlowe:
So this is your rebuttal, Marlowe? A factless equivalence to RNC “dirty tricks” with no evidence? “Typical stuff”. Nothing to see here. Pretty weak.
Of course, if the RNC had been caught fixing the debates and paying rioters to disrupt Hillary rallies, the Dems and the leftist media would still be screaming that the RNC had thrown the election. There would be deafening cries to overturn the results, and redo the vote.
Actually they ARE doing this, but it lacks some conviction since it was the Dems who pulled the dirty tricks, and are now reaping what they’ve sewn.
You and others of your ilk excuse this corrupt behavior, because to the left the ends always justify the means. After all, the left is so enlightened in their own warped version of reality, and we conservative peasants are so ignorant and clueless.
As a result, subterfuge and deceit are necessary tools to attain the goals of the left. The left’s true agenda is so so vile and destructive that most Americans would reject it otherwise.
It is about time your side gets exactly what it deserves.
@July 4th American, #27:
The main thing that has been hacked is the republican brain, which now appears to be completely unguarded by any capacity for making distinctions between fact and fiction. Your opinions about Obama, Clinton, and democrats in general are utterly worthless. You can’t even figure out that you’ve elected a man who has lied constantly throughout his entire campaign to be our next president. Worse still, you show no signs that you even want to figure this out. You hang on his every absurd utterance like he’s Moses come down from the mountain. You prefer not only to believe without evidence, but also to believe what evidence clearly shows to be untrue.
Never has such a situation been more obvious. It’s apparent going into the situation, before the man has even taken office. It was apparent before the election. All people had to do was listen to and think about what he was saying. Too many didn’t get beyond the listening part of the process.
@PhillipMarlowe:
I thought everyone knew how to use google. I guess some on the left haven’t had their training yet.
@Angel Artiste, #32:
I’m curious why would anyone believe the negative consequences of the Trump agenda are only going to be felt by democrats. The disparity will most likely run along the lines of economic class, not political affiliation.
Wealth and privilege will benefit at the expense of everyone else. You’ve elected a multi-billionaire, who is draining the swamp by filling it up with bigger and more aggressive alligators. You’ve got millionaires and billionaires, Wall Street bankers, and the special-interest enemies of regulatory agencies as the new regulators. People apparently take smug satisfaction in the big win, and the thought that Trump’s administration will kick the stuffing out of the federal government establishment, but that’s always been the pillow that’s kept powerful special interests from kicking the stuffing out of the public. It’s the government that has kept the worst and most aggressive alligators fenced in.
@Greg:
I sure can’t think of a good reason why. They’re only saying what Oboma has told them to say.
@Greg: #33
Right…
@PhillipMarlowe:
Gosh, Phillip knows more than the FBI, who says it was. Multiple times.
@Angel Artiste:
That’s really the key. You can bet that the leftist media, while they were largely ignoring the content of the released emails, were working desperately to uncover the same or worse from within the RNC. Like when the corrupt media scrambled all their resources to peruse Palin’s emails to find some good dirt, looks like they can find nothing. Perhaps there is a benefit to having the media hate you; there is no opportunity for collusion and game fixing.
@Greg: 4 years (at least) of President Donald J. Trump. Left wing sore loser cry babies are going to have to get some of that medication for dry eyes, as you cry all the moisture out of them. We’ve complained about wanting adults to occupy the White House again… now we see what utter children were actually there these past 8 years.
It could be that there will be no negative consequences for anyone but those who choose to break US law. I can see plenty of BENEFITS for all Americans, even those who prefer erosion of our country to progress and growth.
@RedTeam, #36:
That’s totally illogical. Think about it for a moment:
Why would the intelligence community seriously compromise itself in order to toady up to a President who will be leaving office in only 11 days, while needlessly alienating the person they’ll all be working for during the next 4 years?
If they were driven by their own interests rather than by concerns about national security, they wouldn’t be saying what they’ve said. They rightly perceive Vladimir Putin as a highly aggressive and highly skilled geopolitical adversary, who can only be held in check by a president who clearly recognizes that he’s playing a deadly serious game of chess with a former KGB agent. Donald Trump doesn’t yet seem to get this. The election is over. Now he needs a crash course in being President. Understanding Vladimir Putin is Lesson #1.
@Greg: Greg, as is abundantly obvious on this thread, illogic is the main arguing tactic of RT and nasty Balrog.@Bill… Deplorable Me: Bill, clicking your heels three times and wishing for it doesn’t make it true. Clintons private email server was not hacked.
@Angel Artiste: artiste, identify politics died on Election Day. So said Trump.
Or was that another lie.
Your bile and anger are disturbing. We saw the same on display in Dallas last July by Micah Johnson.
@Greg:
Is there any evidence anywhere that indicates Obama understood this? What kind of chess gambit was pulling out the missile defense systems in Eastern Europe, hoping Russia would be impressed? What it appears is that Obama, someone that surrounds himself with toadies that constantly assure him of his charisma and greatness, felt someone like Putin would be awed by his aura and bow down before him.
I’ll bet you Trump is a far better chess player than Obama. In chess, the media failing to report on your bad moves will not prevent checkmate. Only skill will. Obama has shown NO skill at anything buy lying with a straight face.
@PhillipMarlowe: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/11/03/former-federal-prosecutor-why-did-doj-limit-and-discourage-fbis-clinton-foundation-probe-n2240856
You let me know when you grow tired of being proven wrong every time, Phillip.
@Bill… Deplorable Me: Townhall.
Sources say.
Sources said Ray (“How do I get my reputation back”) Donovan knowingly had mob connections.
Sorry. I believe in the tooth fairy more than I believe in what fake news Townhall puts up.
FBI: No evidence Clinton’s email was hacked by foreign powers, but it could have been
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/national-security/fbi-no-evidence-clintons-email-was-hacked-by-foreign-powers-but-it-could-have-been/2016/07/05/93334ba0-42dc-11e6-8856-f26de2537a9d_story.html?
FBI Director James Comey testified under oath before Congress on Thursday that Guccifer never hacked into Clinton’s servers and in fact admitted that he lied.
But don’t worry. The short fingered vulgarian will Lock Her Up and you can come back and stick it in my face.
@Bill… Deplorable Me:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/07/us/hillary-clintons-email-was-probably-hacked-experts-say.html
@DrJohn: I had that same link, about to post it. Leftists such as Phillip here love to pretend to be concerned about national security while they defend scum like Hillary unnecessarily putting it in jeopardy.
Of course, you can’t trust those right-wing propaganda sites.
There is no evidence that Clinton’s server was ever hacked.
Perhaps we should consider the possibility that James B. Comey meant precisely what he said—neither more nor less—and was not speaking secret coded messages immediately understandable to private experts, federal investigators, or people wearing tinfoil hats who have missed a few doses of their medication.
While there’s no evidence that it was hacked, circumstantial evidence argues exactly the opposite. Had Clinton’s server been hacked, information from that source would almost certainly have been leaked as part of the effort to prevent her from being elected. That was the primary objective and it was not at all clear that leaks from other sources were going to be sufficient to put Trump in the White House.
@Greg: You don’t get it. Depending upon what information was captured, most likely whomever collected it would not want anyone to know they have it. For instance, knowing the names of operatives, which was on Hillary’s unsecured server, would only be advantageous IF we didn’t know they had them. Once we know, we pull those people out of the field and new faces and names come in. So, what’s the point?
But, you know Greg… you’re probably right. Even though Hillary broke rules and laws to be able to keep all her government business shielded from FOIA requests and kept classified information on an unsecured server in her bathroom, even though her top aid transferred some of that classified information onto her pecker-flashing husband’s lap top, even though her brilliant campaign manager used “password” as a password, even though Hillary used her housekeeper to make copies of classified information, I just bet Hillary outsmarted all the hackers and kept our classified information safe. It just makes perfect sense.
@Bill… Deplorable Me: Greg,
they can’t admit they are wrong.
You don’t know that the names of operatives were on Clinton’s servers any more than you know whether or not Donald Trump wears polka dotted silk bloomers under his suit pants.
My contention is that there was absolutely no such material on her server; that the only classified information consisted of material that was already public or that was retroactively classified upward to avoid exposure resulting from the investigation itself ; that if any such items had been there, at least some would have been leaked to unquestionably prove the case against her and prevent her election.
If you want to speculate about what the Russians might have that they aren’t revealing, speculate about what they might have on Trump himself, as a result of corporate hacking we haven’t heard a thing about. Every damn computer in the guy’s domestic and international business operations would have been a potential target ever since he announced his candidacy. Do you think there are no secrets that could be used to coerce a sitting President? Hillary Clinton is yesterday’s news. She’s last year’s news.