Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

skip fox

(19,359 posts)
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 11:21 AM Jan 2017

So what's this whole thing about Trump and hacking? Why doesn't he drop it?

Possibly because the issue is very important to him. Very, very important to him. More than questioning his so-called "mandate" or even slightly soiling his stunning "success."

Possibly he knows that something else might eventually come out concerning the hacks. Perhaps he wants to discredit the C.I.A. and even the F.B.I. prior to it's revelation.

What might that be?

Could someone in his camp like Manafort have suggested that the Russians hack certain systems and or disclose certain material to Wikileaks? That would be treason.

Could someone have coordinated the dates of the publication of the leaks in Wikileaks. That might not seem as bad, but Trump would still like to avoid confronting it.

Therefore, discredit the sources of intelligence so he doesn't (in his mind) have to face the intelligence.

Otherwise, why doesn't hae just forget the entire matter of the leaks?

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
1. Because he has no control over what his minions have done/are doing on his behalf.
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 11:32 AM
Jan 2017
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-innocent-explanation-of-trump-s-behavior

Say you're Trump.

You have nothing to do with this. You know nothing about it. But think about all the crooks and gamers and sleazeballs around your campaign. There's Manafort, Stone, Page ... all their associates, not to mention your business associates with ties to Russian organized crime. (Stone publicly said he had some sort of a backchannel to Wikileaks.)

If you're Trump, how confident are you that a real investigation wouldn't turn up anything weird? Probably not very.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
 

KittyWampus

(55,894 posts)
3. Thanks for that. And it would make sense they'd keep Trump in the dark. Although, IMO
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 11:41 AM
Jan 2017

he knew at least something. Hence, his comments during the debates. Idiot couldn't keep his mouth shut.

skip fox

(19,359 posts)
4. Exactly. That's the innocent explanation.
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 11:44 AM
Jan 2017

And by implication, Josh Marshall implies how bad the others might be.

 

FredZim

(31 posts)
2. Don't forget wikileaks, the press and the GOP party belated outrage.
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 11:40 AM
Jan 2017

Why does wikileaks get a free pass?
Press also weakly reports source while running story ad nauseum about an email server.
GOP only now feigns outrage after election.
Face it, Clinton campaign did not handle this well. Frankly it's typical DNC weak and indecisive reactions.

Trump is full of shit but his response is to expected. It's the other four actors I so disappointed in.

PatSeg

(47,501 posts)
5. Trump doesn't seem capable of "letting go" of anything
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 11:57 AM
Jan 2017

We saw this throughout the campaign whenever a negative story came out. Instead of deflecting to a Hillary "scandal", he would keep talking about a story that would have died out on its own. This was especially true with the Miss Universe winner, Alicia Machado. It was Trump who kept the story alive and in the headlines. I think the more guilty he is, the more defensive he becomes.

myrna minx

(22,772 posts)
7. I think this thing is way bigger than we can even currently understand.
Sun Jan 1, 2017, 06:27 PM
Jan 2017

I think there's much more at play. This seems to be a long, slow burn of a story.

I read that Paul Ryan's super PAC directly benefited from the hack of Congressional Dem candidates. There are several working parts and their sum seems rather damning.

http://www.salon.com/2016/12/14/gop-super-pac-linked-to-paul-ryan-used-illegally-hacked-material-against-democratic-house-candidates-report/

Trump skips out of intelligence briefings, yet contends he knows "A LOT" about hacking. He's in way over his head with his response, but in true Trump fashion, he doubles down.

I don't know if you're a Seinfeld fan, but his responses remind me of when George Constanza lied about closing on a house in the Hamptons to avoid spending time with the parents of his deceased fiancé. They call his bluff and ask to see the house. George, a serial liar and coward, drives them all the way out to the Hamptons, knowing there's no house, but believes, somehow, he'll get out of this predicament.

He's just so used to lying and doubling down. He's not used to being called on it.

Thanks for the post.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So what's this whole thin...