DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Trump Russia Ties and Hacking of Election

Video on Fox New's Shep smith blasting Donald trump over denying a hack.

https://www.facebook.com/Mediamatters/videos/10154156365116167/

17 national intelligence agencies.

They put the report out.

Are they lying?

There were quite a few conservatives on this board who called that bogus during the election.

Conservatives around the country called it BS.

And now even Mitch freaking McConnel is calling for a bipartisan investigation into this.

Crickets... nobody believes that here. It's all BS...like science and environmental stuff, all BS!

U know Swish ... u raise a good point ...

The polls in Wisconsin showed Hillary winning so big that Russia went in and hacked the paper ballots in Wisconsin .. *LOL* ..

This is STUPID ... the bouncing ball fella's .. Were payhng more attention to this than we did to this ... u know .. THE REAL THREAT TO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY ...

http://www.dw.com/en/russia-suspected-of-hacking-pentagon-email-server/a-18633386

Russia suspected of hacking Pentagon email server

A cyberattack that resulted in the shutdown of a Pentagon email server in late July has been linked to Russia. Some 4,000 military and civilian personnel are believed to have had their data compromised in the breach.

Russia-based hackers infiltrated the email network of the United States Pentagon's Joint
Chiefs of Staff, shutting down the system for two weeks, US broadcaster NBC reported on Thursday.

The intrusion occurred around July 25 and affected some 4,000 military and civilian personnel. The Pentagon confirmed that the Joint Chiefs' email system was indeed shut down pending an investigation, but did not provide any further details on the attack. The Joint Chiefs of Staff is a body of senior US military officials who advise the president on military matters.

"We continue to identify and mitigate cybersecurity risks across our networks," said Pentagon spokeswoman Lieutenant Colonel Valerie Henderson. "With those goals in mind, we have taken the Joint Staff network down and continue to investigate. Our top priority is to restore services as quickly as possible."

"As a matter of policy and for operational security reasons, we do not comment on the details of cyber incidents or attacks against our networks," she added.
The attack relied on an automated system that rapidly gathered massive amounts of data, unnamed sources told NBC. It is unclear if the attack had been sanctioned by the Russian government.

"It was a spear phishing attack traced to [Russia]," an unnamed official told news agency Reuters. A second unnamed official said Russia was the leading suspect in the attack, but cautioned that it would take time for investigators to attribute blame.

Officials said no classified information was seized or compromised, but that the Pentagon opted to shut down the entire email system while it carried out its investigation.
News of the hack comes as it was revealed some 21 million US government employees, contractors and others had their personal information compromised in two separate attacks believed to be carried out by China.

And in late April, US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter blamed Russian hackers for an attack on an unclassified US military network.

Then there's this ... anythng at all to discredit Trumps VICTORY ....

He WON .... GET OVER IT ...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/12/...assessment.html

Top intel office not on same page as CIA regarding Russia hack assessment


The nation’s top intelligence office is not on the same page as the CIA regarding its assessment that Russia interfered in the U.S. elections in a bid to help Donald Trump, a U.S. government source confirmed to Fox News on Tuesday.


The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the U.S. intelligence community, has not fully embraced the CIA finding.

Fox News is told that several U.S. election-related hacking incidents are being wrongly lumped together, when they should be treated as separate events -- these cover breaches at the Democratic National Committee and another campaign arm; in a top Hillary Clinton campaign official’s email account; and at state election boards.

Reuters reports that while the ODNI does not dispute the CIA’s general analysis on Russia hacking, the office is not convinced of the evidence that Moscow sought specifically to help Trump defeat Democratic opponent Clinton.

The government source told Fox News the discrepancy comes down to Russia’s intent.

One official also told Reuters that the CIA’s judgment was based on the fact that only Democratic information was leaked. The official called this a “thin reed upon which to base an analytical judgment.”

The developments further underscore how U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies may be at odds over an assessment that has fueled Democratic complaints and questions about the race -- and spurred bipartisan calls for deeper congressional investigation.

The Clinton campaign chairman who was hacked, John Podesta, even backed calls for electors -- who are set to formally choose the president next week, based on the results of the Nov. 8 election -- to get an intelligence briefing on Russian interference in the race.

Trump, though, has pushed back hard at the reported assessment, calling it “ridiculous” in an interview with “Fox News Sunday.”

Potential space between the CIA and the ODNI on the matter was first revealed in a letter Monday from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. The letter, obtained by Fox News, noted that the CIA finding conflicts with Clapper’s mid-November public testimony.

"On November 17, 2016, you told the Committee during an open hearing that the IC (Intelligence Community) lacked strong evidence connecting Russian government cyberattacks and WikiLeaks disclosures,” Nunes wrote.

In response to a question at the time from ranking Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, Clapper had said, “As far as the WikiLeaks connection, the evidence there is not as strong and we don't have good insight into the sequencing of the releases or when the data may have been provided. We don't have as good insight into that.”

The Nunes letter continued, “According to new press reports, this is no longer the CIA’s position … I was dismayed that we did not learn earlier, from you directly about the reported conflicting assessments and the CIA’s reported revision of information previously conveyed to this Committee.”

Nunes is requesting a briefing from the CIA and FBI on the current assessment of alleged Russian involvement related to the U.S. election no later than Dec. 16.

The Washington Post first reported Friday that the CIA concluded in a secret assessment that Russia interfered in the race to boost Trump, not just undermine confidence in the system. Intelligence agencies reportedly found individuals connected to the Russian government gave WikiLeaks hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee, as well as from Podesta – though the agencies did not have “specific intelligence” showing Kremlin officials directed the activity.

The Post reported, however, that the FBI also gave a differing account on potential Russian interference.

The Post reported Tuesday that the CIA assessment was based in part on intelligence indicating Moscow’s hacking disproportionately affected Democratic targets.

Fox News’ Catherine Herridge contributed to this report.

You couldn't even stay on topic and deflected to Another topic.

Also, this article was written last year.

We are discussing THIS hack. Which, by the way, is from the same damn country.

The country who we current have two puppets working in our us government working for.

One puppet is represents big oil. The other just told the American people, who doesn't go to intelligence briefings, that the agencies are lying about the hack because for whatever reason, the agencies are salty about the election.

Y'all just elected a freaking Russian puppet into the damn White House.

Congrats.

Mitch McConnell wants to investigate this to the fullest extent. The kicker? His wife is on Trump's cabinet.

LETS NOT FORGET THE FBI ...

Hate to have the FACTS get in the way of being SORE LOSERS!!!!

Again ... where was all this outrage when and coverage when the PENTAGON WAS HACKED INTO ...

If this tells me one thing .. its that we need BETTER CYBER SECURITY cause ours in FAILING to protect our servers .....

This is INCREDIBLE to me ..

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2...acking-n2258469


Reports: FBI, CIA Not On The Same Page About Russian Hacking (Maybe Because The Evidence About Russia Helping Trump Is Not Substantiated)

Contrary to claims made by Democrats about Russian interference helping President-elect Donald J. Trump, there is no definitive proof that the Kremlin ordered such cyber attacks. It’s all based on circumstantial evidence, innuendo, and anonymous sources that are bound by an apparent inter-agency feud between the CIA and the FBI. On December 10, The Washington Post reported that both agencies were not on the same page, which seemed to have angered Democrats:

Sitting before the House Intelligence Committee was a senior FBI counterintelligence official. The question the Republicans and Democrats in attendance wanted answered was whether the bureau concurred with the conclusions the CIA had just shared with senators that Russia “quite” clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House.

For the Democrats in the room, the FBI’s response was frustrating — even shocking.
During a similar Senate Intelligence Committee briefing held the previous week, the CIA’s statements, as reflected in the letter the lawmakers now held in their hands, were “direct and bald and unqualified” about Russia’s intentions to help Trump, according to one of the officials who attended the House briefing.

The competing messages, according to officials in attendance, also reflect cultural differences between the FBI and the CIA. The bureau, true to its law enforcement roots, wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something beyond all reasonable doubt. The CIA is more comfortable drawing inferences from behavior.

The Post added that the meeting from the FBI briefer reportedly devolved into Democrats trying to corner the briefer on whether Russia had a favorite in this election. It all boiled down to a lack of evidence to definitively say that Russia helped Trump in this election, which is something President Obama has been quiet on, despite the palace intrigue that has permeated the air waves.

Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept also tore into the claims that Russia hacked the election to help Trump, slamming Democrats for jumping the gun on the CIA’s incomplete claims as gospel.

Greenwald added that there should be some pretty basic ground rules when it comes to Russia, hacking, and the 2016 election. No one should be making claims, like Democrats have, concerning hacking without evidence (a no-brainer, right?), that CIA reports should be subject to extreme scrutiny since they lie for a living, that people should take into account the FBI-CIA feud, and that the last 24-48 hours have been rife with contradictions, which should add to the uncertainty. No one is saying don’t investigate these claims, but the Left, in their inability to actually take responsibility for nominating one of the most flawed candidates to ever run for the presidency, have gone gung-ho with these Russians totally hacked the election to help Trump claims that are unsubstantiated at best.

Moreover, Greenwald also adds the biases between the two agencies; how the intelligence community was staunchly opposed to Trump, whereas those who were investigating Clinton’s email fiasco at the FBI were hoping she would get prosecuted for not following protocol concerning sensitive material or at least stripping her of her security clearance. At the same time, it’s also a bit surprising since the Clintons reportedly made even members of the intelligence community nervous due to her penchant to play by a different set of rules—or at least that’s what David Ignatius postulated.

Frankly, an unauthorized and unsecure server that was capable of being hacked by foreign actors and most certainly had classified material sent through it (though not classified at the time) is more startling. She actually skirted protocol; Trump didn’t. Three emails that were sent through Clinton’s server were determined to be classified at the time they were sent and received, but were marked improperly. Regardless, in the end, Greenwald’s main point is that anonymous sources are not akin to actionable evidence:

Is this the denial stage you're currently going through?

17 intelligence agencies. Republican senators.

Fox freaking news anchors blasting trump.

And yet.....they all are lying. They are all in on this conspiracy.

It's ok bro. You're boy is a Russian puppet. I know it's hard to admit, but we are all here for you.

Honestly law enforcement/national defense in this country is top down moronic. Not only do you have police killing unarmed people. You have your two biggest national security agencies in a fight over intelligence on the same event. And people want to give all of these departments and agencies MORE power? The only time these agencies seem competent is when they're assassinating someone.

He didn't have a choice.

All that noise republicans were making about the hacks during the election, he has got to stand tall now. It's confirmed. Putin tried to rig the election.

It ain't a conspiracy.

It ain't rumors.

It ain't locker room talk.

It's real talk bro.

Mitch McConnel is not only watching Trump actively take Putin's side over our own intelligence community, he's watching Trump appoint cabinet positions to guys with obvious and public Kremlin ties.

How many times did they miss on Castro? How long did it take to find Bin Laden? We're still waiting on the WMD's to be found.

I don't think they're competent at anything.

Where is the NSA in all this? Don't they monitor everything going on? Don't they have records?

Yep .. They're all sitting in the Kremlin laughing at us, having a shot of vodka and snuggling up to Eric Snowden's hard drive.

Help me out. What hacked e-mails/computers.....what info came out that hurt clinton, or helped trump?

Some of actually have jobs during the day. Swish posted his o.p. at 12:10 pm. You posted this at 12:19 pm.


PROVEN science and environmental stuff is awesome. I love it. Unproven hypothesis is/are just that. Unproven. Worth studying? Sure.

I dunno what point you're trying to make.

The issue is that a foreign nation hacked us. Period. It doesn't matter what helped what or hurt who. It's the fact that it happened, and Trump is trying to blow it off and take sides with Russia over our own intelligence community.

Comment on that.

The true answer as I see it is that NOT one of those emails hurt Clinton or helped Trump. But what the Trump campaign and republicans did with them is pretty suspect. I mean the beating she took was amazing. Not sure how she withstood it until the end to be honest.

And yet, we still don't know if there was TRULY anything damaging in them. Embarrassing, probably, but truly damaging to America, we really don't know.

Look .. i don't wanna sound like an ass .. but as usual you've left me NO CHOICE ...

1. Why would I be in denial .. MY CHOICE and the only one that could POSSIBLY save OUR country won ... i'm THRILLED ...

And the DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE and the FBI say the CIA's claim is BS ...

Whose in denial .. and it ain't the guy on the WINNING "SQUAD" .. *L* ,, BTW .. that was a very revealing statement ... very revealing ...

2. TRUMP IS no ones puppet ... he's proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt ....

3. OUR NATIONAL SECURITIES not important? .. *LOL* ..

THE BOUNCING BALL SWISH .... maybe your to stoned to see it ...

somehow because it happend a year ago means its not RELEVANT ....

4. I'll discuss WHATEVER I LIKE ... THANK U ..

5. And the BEST PART ... no one has DENIED a thing in ANY OF THE E-MAILS ... oh wait ... Donna Brazil did ... then within in 48 HOURS she was PROVEN to be a LIAR ...

Then that lying windbag had the audacity to say she didn't regret ANYTHING she'd said or done .. AFTER she'd been PROVEN to be a LIAR!!!

She's arrogant just like the rest of tou libs ... INCREDIBLE ...

I thought I did.

The story we are being told is the russians hacked the dnc (and the rnc, apparently)) in order to help Trump win the election.

So, my question remains: HOW did the hacked e-mails help trump, OR hurt hillary? How did the e-mails affect the election? If they didn't affect the election, why are so many people claiming it did?

I've even read that some are saying this is what the electoral college needs to elect hillary.




And, if this hacking is such a big deal, why did all the d's ignore hillary deleting some 30,000 emails?



Yeah, I don't like that the u.s. got hacked - but exactly what/how did that affect the election?

So just to be clear.

You're taking the side of Trump and Putin over the side of us national intelligence, US media who reported on it during the election, and Republican leadership.

Then we have the portion of supporters like Arch who are trying to deflect to something else.

Putin and his homeys probabaly threw a party when Trump got elected.

So did the banks, and so did the oil companies.

Well, you guys took your country back. So this is what it looks like.

Chill dude.

The whole thing has been painted as russia was affecting the election - yet no where has anyone said how, other than "the russians hacked some e-mails"

Explain to me how that affected the election. You seem super well versed in this - so, exactly HOW did it affect the election?

If it didn't, please say so.

Russia apparently hacked u.s. computers. Ok. I bet they have spies also.

Now, what info they got could be big - as of now, we don't know, right?

But I, at this point, can't see how it affected the election to favor Trump. If there is proof of that I'd love to see it.

of course it had an effect.

dude, you wouldn't shut up about it. every other post this election cycle was you bringing up wikileaks and the hacked emails about what clinton was saying in speeches and what not.

and it wasn't just you, it was a good 6-7 consistent on this board.

and that was ALL the media attention on hillary. all about the emails and the hack to see what was in those. that's all conservatives around the country wanted to talk about.

this is why i call what you're doing a deflection. you completely trashed her over the hack emails and such, and now you're trying to play dumb as if you don't know what the big deal is.

So comment on the actual topic at hand. or i'll just chalk it up to you being completely pointless again. not surprising.

Maybe we're just missing each other here.

None of my posts were about the hacked DNC e-mails - at least that I remember.

Yes, many of my posts were about hillary deleting some 30.000 e-mails after she was ordered to turn over her server.

And yes, I was absolutely looking for wiki leaks to have some dreadful (for hillary) e-mails.

I never saw anything that mattered.

I do like how you deflect about the self deleted hillary e-mails through out the election. Yet, now those unknown e-mails matter to you?

Wait, the news is saying the russians possibly hacked the dnc computers. That wouldn't have anything to do with hillary's deleted e-mails. Right? I mean, just ask her: the deleted e-mails were only about yoga, and chelsea's wedding, etc.

So, what hacked e-mails from the dnc affected the election? And how.

And remember, hillary assured us none of her e-mails had been hacked.

WHAT affected the election? NO emails came out. (that I'm aware of). And yet here you sit trying to say the hacking did affect the election.

CAn't have it both ways. Can't say no e-mails were hacked, then turn around and say the russians hacked the e-mails to affect the election - and have no evidence of hacked e-mails affecting it.

you absolutely made a big deal about the emails that were hacked.

so did a ton of people. pointless. again. not surprising

___________

see, this is the deflection. it's classic.

question whether or not Russia had anything to do with the emails when its being reported during the election season.

now that it's been confirmed, question whether or not it had any actual effect, instead of acknowledging the big picture problem with this and discussing that. change the topic.

but you know what? you guys took your country back. conservatives won't go storm the streets of DC over confirmed facts of a foreign government hacking up to rig an election, but they will storm a restaurant over a fake news article about Hillary and child trafficking .

Nah man. You are misrembering. ( ) I didn't make ANY deal out of the hacked e-mails. Sorry for your confusion on that.

I DID make a big deal out of hillary deleting some 30,000 of her e-mails after she was ordered to turn over her server. Perhaps the distinction between those facts is confusing you?

Deflection, sir, is you stating falsehoods when confronted with the question of "So, HOW did these hacked e-mails from the dnc affect the election?"......and the only reply you can give is ......"but, but, but". Show me the e-mails that affected the election.

Russia hacks u.s. computers probably every day. I don't like it - but I've seen not one shred of evidence that those unkown e-mails affected the election. I've asked you numerous times to link to the e-mails that affected the election. And you can't/haven't. Period.




Hey, "us guys" didn't take back our country. To use your words "Your gal gave it back." You guys should've nominated someone that had a chance to win instead of nominating someone that sat on her throne and lied through her teeth to her ignorant followers.

Your statement here:

Swish, I'll ask one last time: How did russia rig the election??????????????????????????????????

And one last question: Your statement:


Was that conservatives that did that? Or was it 1 person that did that? Thanks in advance for answering that question. It's not a trick question at all. But you might want to re-think your statement about generalizing about "all" conservatives. If not, then you are okay with others generalizing about christians, muslims, blacks, whites, hispanics etc.

you're asking questions that were provided in the link i posted.

that tells me you didn't watch it. that's not my problem if you want to play stupid at this point.

this is why i don't respond to have the crap you post. because half the BS you're asking has already been answered.

but i get it. you and Diam are trying to play the deflect and denial game. i provided a link, and the information is out there with credible sources, with multiple republican leadership also confirming the intelligence findings.

if you want to continue to act stupid and not take the time to educate yourself, it's not my problem. but look at your own actions as to why Trump won.

He loves the uneducated, after all.

Hacks before the election were no big deal and liberals swept it under the rug. Clinton loses. Now all of a sudden this is a big deal to liberals. Liberal flip flopping since the election has been priceless.


Anyway, if there is intel on what the russians did, then investigate it. What exactly is going to be done about it? Obama shaking his finger sternly at Putin and say "don't do that again"

supposedly Russia been messing with it since 2008, why didn't Obama investigate then?

We've been hacked by foreign countries before and I don't recall liberals caring about it.

hacks were/are suppose to be a big deal to everyone, especially if the hack is done by a foreign nation.

right now, even republican leadership is calling a spade a spade. this is bipartisan.

No. Your link didn't say anything about how the russians affected the election. Not 1 thing about it. I watched the link twice. Not 1 word about what hacked e-mail/s affected the election.

Read what I posted above.


I've asked repeatedly for you to tell me which e-mails affected the election. You have deflected, declined, and now are trying to call me out on my asking "dumb" questions.

Questions that, if you were to be believed, are obvious. Yet you can't post the obvious. Weird.

Love how you attempt to belittle me by grouping me with diam. That's a trick that only people with nothing to stand on use.

I haven't deflected anything. Sorry - you are the one doing that. Your link provides NO evidence of russia affecting the election. None. NADA. And that's what I've been asking you for - proof that the russians affected the election.

Did the dnc get hacked? Sure looks like it. How did that affect the election. Please swish, answer that question that I've asked you about 15 times in just this thread.

Don't deflect. Don't change the topic. Don't run and hide.



Another poor attempt at putting the focus on me. I've educated myself. I've even asked you to help educate me on how the hacked e-mails affected the election.

You refuse to do so. That tells us all 1 thing: You have nothing on that topic. But, rather than admit that, you attack me. Typical of you. You are of the nature that "the more I speak it, and the louder I speak it, the 'righter' I'll be.

I've asked you a fairly simple question, and you refuse to answer - possibly because you can't?


I love that line, and how the sore loser liberals take it out of context.

Hey bud, your gal lost the election, trump didn't win it. Your gal was practicing her acceptance speech when she threw her hat in the ring.

And yeah, some of it has to do with rural people in the fly over states feeling left out of her campaign.

ONE LAST TIME: WHAT HACKED E-MAILS AFFECTED THE ELECTION??? (even though hillary assured us no e-mails were hacked, and she didn't delete any e-mails from her server......until she admitted she did delete e-mails from her server, and she only used 1 device, although she in fact used something like 10......but then the hacked e-mails from the dnc by russia....and - man, I can't keep up with her lies. Your girl lost the election on her own)

Now, tell me, or link for me, the hacked e-mails that cost hillary the election.

so what i got out of that is that you're a baby who is incapable of learning things on your own, and need your hands held for everything.

start the video at 1:48.

the russians hacked democratic officials and gave them to wikileaks.

the wikileaks situation is STILL being talked about non stop. literally everybody on this board was talking about it non stop. the entire country was talking about it non stop.

that literally answers your question as to how and why.

again, i already said that. you just don't like the answer. that's why i'm saying you are trying to play stupid right now. it literally came up in the general election debates. of course that topic affected the elections. everybody was talking about the DNC and bernie sanders.

how many bernie or bust people didn't vote for her because of that? a crap ton. we have liberals right here on the board that refused to vote for her mainly because of that issue.

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...m=.7808a5678c9c

if i need to hold your hand, then just say so.

and again, i answered your question about which emails. such as the transcripts over Hillary's wall street speech.

So yea, i will lump you and Diam together until you stop deflecting and discuss the situation at hand.

Right now, we have a president-elect putting in kremlin-friendly cabinet members while we have the intelligence community saying that Putin hacked democrats in order to sway the election to Trump.

you're trying to argue over which emails affected instead actually being outraged and discussing that a foreign freaking government hacked intel to try and rig our elections.

i repeated myself again with you, and this will be the last time.

either stick to that, or me and you have zero left to discuss. i'm tired of wasting my time with you.

i can't believe i wasted time explaining the obvious.

anyway, moving on:

looks like republican bigwigs are wanting to open up an investigation.

should be interesting how This affects other cabinet positions, or his presidency once it starts.

While i'm glad senate wants to attempt to look into this, i have to be concerned about their future effort on this.

such as, will they go after this with the same vigor that they did with Hillary and her emails.

So, in other words, the russian hacked e-mails didn't affect the election.

Thanks for admitting that.

Oh, I'm not a baby. That might even be called "name calling"? I got suspended for less than that.

Are you a sore loser? Seems that way.






Don't worry, I'll hold your hand through all your grieving.

Russia most certainly interfered with our elections. However, if they interfered with our election process, the voting process, that is what we need to be worried about. Obama needs to declassify these reports if they do exist. We need transparency from the government even more now. If not a member needs to pull a Snowden or a Manning. That's the only time our government has been transparent since Reagan admitted the contra affairs. Heck, I doubt the FBI knows anything. I've seen Penelope Garcia and she doesn't look that impressive. Although neither do the CIA folks. I think they have too much fun hiding behind things to do any work. I'm with Arch, what does the NSA say? If anyone knows something isn't normal, it'd be the NSA. After all they monitor our whole nation. Every single bit.

That's the line of thought I am at after reading some of the news.

Yet, the headlines containing Russia, hacks, election....make it seem as if they tampered with the election results which I don't believe occurred.

The releasing of wikileaks and DNC emails may have influenced some voters and if Russia was responsible for that then you have a foreign government conducting a propaganda war on the citizens, regardless of who was the victim (DNC/Hillary)

I'll be interested in seeing how this plays out in Trump's presidency. If Russia was indeed trying to influence THIS election what's to prevent them from influencing the next? And maybe not in Trump's favor????

What an ignorant take. Should we give the criminals more power?

Oh wait............we already have.

I'll take freedom over security any day

And I will take life over death any day!

Those are the words of someone who will sell out the US to a foreign nation or organization.

Right.

1 more reason I'm glad hillary didn't win the election.