What Trump doesn't get (or ignores) about Russian hacking - Baltimore Sun
President-elect Donald Trump clearly doesn't get, or at least chooses to ignore, the significance of the election-related hacking that U.S. intelligence agencies have traced to Russia. And no matter what one might think of the revelations contained in emails that somehow wound up in the possession of groups like WikiLeaks -- or whether those leaks even made any difference in the election results -- the notion that a foreign government, any government, may have covertly meddled in a U.S. election ought to scare everyone.
Yet Mr. Trump continues his campaign of denials, sending only good and happy http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fashion thoughts at Russian President Vladimir Putin, former KGB foreign intelligence officer, invader of Crimea, oppressor of dissidents, slaughterer of innocent Syrian civilians. On Friday, Mr. Trump took to Twitter to praise one of the more embarrassing revelations revealed by the cyberattack -- that Donna Brazile may have leaked to the Clinton campaign questions at a town hall debate hosted by CNN where she worked as a commentator.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_qqmrkWsOM
That sure was embarrassing, particularly for Ms. Brazile and CNN. We agree wholeheartedly -- if she was doing that, she had no business working as a paid commentator for the news network.
But what about the motivations of the leaker? Those matter, too. In real-world journalism, it's considered critical to evaluate where information comes from -- whether, for example, it's leaked by someone with an ax to grind or by the White House for political purposes. That's important for helping to determine the information's veracity and whether it reflects the whole story. Journalists check these things out and give those implicated a chance to respond in advance of publication.
There's no shortage of embarrassing information in the world, but when a foreign government employs its intelligence apparatus to collect it and then selectively dispense it in order to achieve a certain result -- whether to foster the election of a particular candidate or simply to sow doubts about the integrity of our elections -- that ought to matter to our president-elect. Can you imagine if the results had been reversed and such hacking had helped his opponent? Mr. Trump had already made clear his intent to tear apart the integrity of the nation's voting system without a shred of evidence had Hillary Clinton won.
US elector demands briefing on Russia election interferenceMATT O'BRIENWeeks after Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election to Donald Trump, some of her loyal supporters have not given up hope. Clay Pell, a vocal supporter of the Democrat during her long campaign and one of the 538 members of the Electoral College, said the process has been tarnished by Russian...Weeks after Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election to Donald Trump, some of her loyal supporters have https://www.theguardian.com/fashion altogether clear that such a line-in-the-sand will be maintained after Jan. 20 when Mr. Trump is sworn in.
Of all the pinch-me unrealities of the reality TV star's unlikely political http://www.jsutrightstyle.com/fashion-style/the-best-online-store-for-womens-fashion-lularoe.html
