You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

17
-17

[–] Henry_Monkfish 17 points -17 points (+0|-17) ago 

Any evidence that Hillary broke into her own emails to frame the Russians?

Nope. As per usual, you idiots are just making up your own version of reality and trying to con others into believing it.

0
11

[–] FeelinFroggy 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

Boy howdy, nothing says "I like to take it in the butt" quite like the phrase "you idiots."

I look forward to your next username.

1
2

[–] 6585944? 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

You ever hear of the phrase "innocent until proven guilty"? That applies here.

Is Hillary Clinton innocent or guilty of any crimes? Judging by the mountain of evidence for a huge number of crimes ("sending classified information on a private server with 'extreme carelessness'/'gross negligence'", "destroying evidence in a criminal investigation", "intentionally sending that information with little regard for security or proper procedure", "taking campaign contributions from foreign donors", "colluding with the media to rig an entire primary election, and systematically target her opponent in the main election", "doing favors 'quid pro quo' for people who donated to her Foundation", "sending paid goons to attack Trump and Sanders rallies", "purposely planning on how to lie in front of Congress" {AKA "perjury", the same crime that got Bill impeached and disbarred}, etc.), she is about as guilty as it gets.

Are the Russians innocent or guilty of "hacking various US computer systems"? Before we look at that, we have to understand a few things about how hacking works.
1, the US is basically the undisputed father of 'using cyberattacks against foreign enemies' (Can you say "Stuxnet"?), so, if anything, a cyberattack from Russia against the US is already probably just them firing back after a cyberattack we launched on them.
2, if you're a decent hacker, you won't leave any real trace of who you were or where your attack came from (note: scriptkiddies are not decent hackers, and that is why they are often tracked down and arrested for hitting a few sites).
3, if you're a good hacker, you can easily leave some fake info that makes it look like some other hacker group did the job (easiest one: a random hacker decides to place an image of the Anonymous group's Guy Fawkes mask on a server, even though the hacker doesn't actually associate with the group), so even if you did find something that looks like a certain group was behind the attack, it is unreliable evidence at best, or completely misleading at worst.
4, every single time anyone has mentioned that "the Russians hacked US servers", they have always added that "there is not enough concrete evidence", because this claim originated from the mouth of politicians without a single shred of evidence supporting their claim.
So, in short, we have no sign of aggression on their part (at the most, it might be retaliation, or it might just be one of the world's longest games of international "Tag, you're hacked"), we have no solid evidence that they're doing anything to our computers, and we have no evidence that this is anything other than a political PR campaign to try and sell the American public on the idea of a war with Syria/Russia. Therefore, we have no proof of guilt, which means that at this time and with the evidence presented before us, we must declare Russia to be innocent of all current "cyberattack" charges.