FatHobbit;1852556 wrote:I find it amusing that people still are concerned with Russian hackers influencing the election. When the media says influencing the election, what they really mean is exposing Hillary's private server that she used to improperly handle classified information, and then she obstructed justice by deleting the emails after a subpoena was issued that those emails be handed over.
Also, don't forget the emails that detailed how the democratic party fucked Bernie and how the dnc chairman gave Hillary the questions prior to the debate.
But yeah, let's just call that interfering with the election.
A foreign government hacked a political party in the U.S. and then used another overseas source to post the emails. Those emails, along with a bunch of other factors, was why Clinton lost. But, the ends do not justify the means. The fact that a foreign government hacked into a U.S. political party needs to be examined and explored to the fullest extent. That includes if there were any ties in the U.S. that knew of the hacking and dissemination of the information.
This applies not only to the Russia/ Clinton emails, but also if any future country, saying China or North Korea, hacks into any other political party.
It should remain a story and needs to be fully investigated until we figure out how exactly it happened.
FatHobbit;1852558 wrote:Like when Hillary tried to pretend the Benghazi attack was due to a YouTube video? And then when questioned about it said "at this point, what difference does it make?"
Why does the "unbiased" media ignore that?
I'm confused. So, if that was bad, what Trump said today and what the WH said, was that also bad as well?