Tags: Trump Administration | Democrats 2016 | Donald Trump | Russia | computer | cyber | hack

Poor Campaign, Not Cybercrime Cost Dems 2016

Poor Campaign, Not Cybercrime Cost Dems 2016


Wednesday, 18 January 2017 02:53 PM Current | Bio | Archive

Hacked or not hacked? That is the question.

But it shouldn’t be, because the question itself  — "Did the Russians hack our presidential election?" — is preposterous. Yet it’s an issue that continues to dominate headlines, despite zero evidence to that claim.

The only thing being hacked is the truth. Those propagating this myth are either woefully misinformed about what hacking an election actually entails.

Or, shamelessly spinning an absurd narrative they believe benefits their political agenda.

Here’s the truth on the election hacking issue: 

  • Computers at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) were accessed by unauthorized parties (hacked), and many embarrassing emails and documents were released. Some in the U.S. intelligence community allege that the Russian government was behind the malicious attack, though that claim has not been fully substantiated — in large part because the FBI never forensically examined the DNC servers.
  • No one is asking, so what? What does breaking into DNC computers have to do with hacking an election? Absolutely nothing.
  • What occurred is a crime, and nothing more. A crime, by the way, that damn near every one of us should be familiar with, since we have likely all been victims of hacking. From Target to Home Depot to Yahoo, countless companies have been hacked. That’s not to minimize the seriousness of the crime. It must be thoroughly investigated. But, it’s a cybercrime — not an election violation. Equating the two is naïve at best, disingenuous at worst.
  • Whenever politicians are accused of corruption, their standard defense is that the charges are "politically motivated." That is the wrong answer. The question should never be whether something is politically motivated, but whether it’s true. And that’s exactly the case with the DNC hacking.
  • Of course the hacking was politically motivated! What else would it be? And since the suspect list is long, from disgruntled employees to Bernie Sanders supporters to yes, the Russians, no one should be off the table.
  • Again, so what? No DNC officials or Clinton campaign staffers are arguing that the hacked emails are fake. Embarrassing? Yes. Incriminating? You bet. Politically costly? Absolutely. But true.
  • Democrats whining about the election being "hacked" are, in reality, upset about the incriminating things they said and did being released. Period. Whether those things were better kept confidential is irrelevant; they are true, and some people cast a vote based on those truths. If the Democrats in question were so worried about looking bad if it became known that they sabotaged Bernie Sanders, then they shouldn’t have done it in the first place.
  • The only people to blame for the resulting political carnage are the Democratic leaders themselves. You reap what you sow. Deal with it.
  • True election hacking involves stuffing the ballot box. Sure, games have been played with voting machines (it is now universally accepted that vote rigging in Chicago and Texas cost Richard Nixon the 1960 election). And on a small scale, it can still occur today. But hacking an election nationwide is impossible. There are too many different voting systems in the fifty states, all of which are protected with numerous safeguards, for an entity to rig an election through computer hacking.
  • So even if the Russians are behind the DNC hack, they did not affect a single ballot. That fact is reason enough to stop referring to the DNC cybercrime as "election hacking." It’s not! That cannot be stressed enough.

Because Donald Trump has been criticized for his cozy relationship with Putin, he should allow the investigation to proceed unhindered (with some independent investigators taking leadership roles so that politics do not enter the equation) letting the facts lead where they may.

Trump won fair and square. Understandably, he doesn’t want any perception that he won  — illegitimately — a charge being leveled by his opponents as either sour grapes or an attempt to derail his agenda.

All the more reason to use his bully pulpit, explaining the difference between DNC computer hacking and election hacking, and pledging not to interfere in the investigation — showing he’s not a typical politician.

Not a single vote was physically altered as a result of the DNC hack. Truth is, the revelations made American voters more informed by providing a window of transparency that the Democratic leadership would never dream of offering.

Since the information was accurate, it makes no difference how it was obtained, and it should be accepted just as readily as verified information published by the media from "anonymous" sources (such as Trump’s leaked tax returns).

The DNC did a hack job running the Clinton campaign, but that’s no excuse to inject a red herring into a free, fair . . . and unhacked election.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, Freindly Fire Zone Media. Read more reports from Chris Freind — Click Here Now.


© 2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
Trump won fair and square. Understandably, he doesn’t want any perception that he won illegitimately. A charge being leveled by his opponents as either sour grapes or an attempt to derail him. The DNC did a hack job running the Clinton campaign.
computer, cyber, hack, hacking
Wednesday, 18 January 2017 02:53 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved