# Should I be outraged by "Russian hacking"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 15, 2016, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765 "2016-12-15T13:06:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Throatwarbler_Mangrove)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/81 "2016-12-20T01:17:22Z")
Isn’t the whole point of elections to reflect the will of the people? Suppose the hacking had been done by an American, I dunno, the Koch brothers or something. Clinton was embarrassed and the electorate don’t elect her. Is this election illegitimate? How does the nationality of the hacker change anything? This is a really weird argument because it’s based on the premise that the American electorate is so stupid that to allow them to learn of something about a candidate that she maybe didn’t really want them to know about is dangerous and will cause them to vote for the “wrong” candidate, and when that happens the election is illegitimate. If I were a Trump voter my reaction would be “well shit, the corrupt American media lies to me everyday and the libs get all up in arms when Putin dares to do something like reveal the truth, who am I to trust? What else aren’t they telling me? Maybe Estonia _is_ a suburb of St. Petersburg?” 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Throatwarbler_Mangrove)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/82 "2016-12-20T01:25:27Z")
Are Russian elections also illegitimate because the US, a noted hostile power known for engineering putsches all over the world, said some bad things about Putin, some of which was probably turned over to the US via disgruntled Russian informants and might even be true? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/83 "2016-12-20T02:04:10Z")
> [@Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](#): > > Suppose the hacking had been done by an American, I dunno, the Koch brothers or something. Clinton was embarrassed and the electorate don’t elect her. Is this election illegitimate? How does the nationality of the hacker change anything? In your scenario, I’d be quite pleased to see the American in question arrested and convicted for his hacking. In this case, arresting the Russian intelligence services isn’t a realistic remedy. So yes, the nationality changes something. I think that is, frankly speaking, an incredibly obvious difference. > [@](#): > > This is a really weird argument because it’s based on the premise that the American electorate is so stupid that to allow them to learn of something about a candidate that she maybe didn’t really want them to know about is dangerous and will cause them to vote for the “wrong” candidate, and when that happens the election is illegitimate. If I rifled through all your private documents, would I find anything to exploit to make anyone think less of you? Any emails talking about your boss and how awful he is? Any grousing about your mother or significant other? Controversial statements that are better kept to yourself? Is your boss, mother, SO, or anyone else to be considered “so stupid” because their opinion of you could be changed by things you said that you didn’t say to their face? Probably every person who uses email is subject to this kind of – not sure what to call it really – it isn’t blackmail, it isn’t character assasination, it’s just a very brutal and personal assault on a person. And even if you didn’t say anything bad, having all your emails out there may allow nutjobs to “connect the dots” to assert that you are really a child sex addict who goes to an particular pizza parlor. You think that is a harmless thing to have thrown at you? ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/84 "2016-12-20T02:47:24Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > If I rifled through all your private documents, would I find anything to exploit to make anyone think less of you? Any emails talking about your boss and how awful he is? Any grousing about your mother or significant other? Controversial statements that are better kept to yourself? Is your boss, mother, SO, or anyone else to be considered “so stupid” because their opinion of you could be changed by things you said that you didn’t say to their face? Kept between you and the person(s) you sent the email to? How is this different than private conversations recorded without the consent of one party? I assume DT didn’t want his pussy remarks made known. Anytime you communicate to someone else, you have a risk of that communication being intercepted or even the parties you are communicating with passing along that communication to any number of people. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/85 "2016-12-20T02:52:22Z")
I’m not sure you actually have a point. Given many conversations between A and B, there’s a substantial chance that things will be said that others (C, D, etc… Z) will take poorly. That doesn’t mean that C-Z are stupid, as **TM** either implied or plainly asserted. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/86 "2016-12-20T04:06:03Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m not sure you actually have a point. If the emails were modified from their original content, then that is one thing. That they were what was actually said is embarrassing for those who said it. A learning lesson for all involved. Next time you want to subvert the process of candidate selection, don’t leave a paper trail. > [@](#): > > Given many conversations between A and B, there’s a substantial chance that things will be said that others (C, D, etc… Z) will take poorly. That doesn’t mean that C-Z are stupid, as **TM** either implied or plainly asserted. I wouldn’t say c-z are stupid. A and B quite possibly. I know there are many things I’ve said over the years that are pretty stupid (many on this board!) that I’d probably like to take back. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/87 "2016-12-20T04:54:00Z")
> [@crucible](#): > > Fake news? Are you, too, an apologist for the Destruction of Government Services (DOGS) Cabinet? Time to get your head out of Trump’s trousers. Trump may well have committed treason. Several of his people surely did and should be hanged for it. That’s ludicrous. ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/88 "2016-12-20T16:33:34Z")
> [@Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](#): > > Isn’t the whole point of elections to reflect the will of the people? > > Suppose the hacking had been done by an American, I dunno, the Koch brothers or something. Clinton was embarrassed and the electorate don’t elect her. Is this election illegitimate? How does the nationality of the hacker change anything? > > This is a really weird argument because it’s based on the premise that the American electorate is so stupid that to allow them to learn of something about a candidate that she maybe didn’t really want them to know about is dangerous and will cause them to vote for the “wrong” candidate, and when that happens the election is illegitimate. > > If I were a Trump voter my reaction would be “well shit, the corrupt American media lies to me everyday and the libs get all up in arms when Putin dares to do something like reveal the truth, who am I to trust? What else aren’t they telling me? Maybe Estonia _is_ a suburb of St. Petersburg?” 😕 This is like arguing that Watergate was okay because they were just trying to get legitimate information, not making anything up about the DNC. ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/89 "2016-12-20T16:57:15Z")
> [@theR](#): > > This is like arguing that Watergate was okay because they were just trying to get legitimate information, not making anything up about the DNC. I agree. Additionally, the manner “the truth” is gotten should affect how truthful and complete we think the information is that we are getting and the conclusions we and others are drawing from it. I’m not saying that because the information was revealed through hacking that it and the conclusions drawn from it are inherently false, but that we should exercise a lot more caution when approaching information gotten in such a manner and the conclusions derived from it than I personally have perceived in the wake of the leaks. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/90 "2016-12-21T01:47:11Z")
> [@theR](#): > > This is like arguing that Watergate was okay because they were just trying to get legitimate information, not making anything up about the DNC. That’s two separate things. The information is separate from how it was obtained and stands on its own once it is released. The gathering of the information being illegal but once released, the horse is out of the barn. > [@HumbleThinker](#): > > I agree. Additionally, the manner “the truth” is gotten should affect how truthful and complete we think the information is that we are getting and the conclusions we and others are drawing from it. My first thought was that their email had been hacked and something had been planted. Maybe that was the initial intent, but when they found what was there, they left it as is. Has there been a denial from the DNC that the email contents were false? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/91 "2016-12-21T02:05:45Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Has there been a denial from the DNC that the email contents were false? My recollection was that they would not confirm or deny authenticity. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/92 "2016-12-21T02:11:02Z")
It is a little amusing to see America get it’s panties in a twist because some foreign power interfered in it’s election and possibly installed a puppet. Sounth and Central America must be laughing their asses off, dotcha think? Karma’s a bitch, no doubt. (Of course I haven’t heard a single mention of how dirty America’s own hands are in this regard. But then…fake news…y’know!) ---
**Author:** ![Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Throatwarbler_Mangrove)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/93 "2016-12-21T04:10:07Z")
The legitimacy of the election isn’t affected by the fact that some hackers are Russian is my point. The Red Army didn’t go to the polling station and force anyone to vote for Trump. If you think the hackers should be arrested or a court should make the Russian Federation liable for personal damages to Clinton that’s fine. Donald Trump is still your president. ---
**Author:** ![crucible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@crucible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crucible)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/94 "2016-12-21T11:56:28Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > That’s ludicrous. There are published reports that Russia says they were in contact with the Trump campaign. There was a computer in Trump Tower that was communicating only with a computer in Moscow. Trump asked Russia to interfere, by finding HRC’s emails. The financial entanglements clearly reported of Mandefort’s ties to the deposed Ukrainian Moscow backed President, and with investors in Russia, considering the sanctions imposed by much of the world against Russia. Trump’s praise of Putin. Trump’s denial that Russia had anything to do with hacking the DNC. On and on. Treason can be proved, if even one piece of evidence linking Russian intelligence services to Trump’s advisors is found. There are plenty of paths of inquiry clearly shown for the CIA and FBI to investigate. Treason is clearly a potential charge. Hanging follows. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/95 "2016-12-21T12:14:25Z")
> [@crucible](#): > > There are published reports that Russia says they were in contact with the Trump campaign. There was a computer in Trump Tower that was communicating only with a computer in Moscow. Trump asked Russia to interfere, by finding HRC’s emails. The financial entanglements clearly reported of Mandefort’s ties to the deposed Ukrainian Moscow backed President, and with investors in Russia, considering the sanctions imposed by much of the world against Russia. Trump’s praise of Putin. Trump’s denial that Russia had anything to do with hacking the DNC. On and on. Treason can be proved, if even one piece of evidence linking Russian intelligence services to Trump’s advisors is found. There are plenty of paths of inquiry clearly shown for the CIA and FBI to investigate. Treason is clearly a potential charge. Hanging follows. ISTR the “computer in Trump Tower” was found to be a whole lot of nothing. There are certainly a lot of close ties that Trump, his family, his campaign and his chosen cabinet have to Russia that are disturbing and ought to raise a lot of questions and concerns. But the bar for treason is a lot higher than that, and even though I think Trump is effectively doing Russia’s bidding to the detriment of America in order to enrich himself I’m not seeing anything that comes close to clearing that bar from a legal standpoint. Hanging will certainly not follow even if impeachment eventually does. ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/96 "2016-12-21T16:35:51Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > That’s two separate things. The information is separate from how it was obtained and stands on its own once it is released. The gathering of the information being illegal but once released, the horse is out of the barn. > > My first thought was that their email had been hacked and something had been planted. Maybe that was the initial intent, but when they found what was there, they left it as is. Has there been a denial from the DNC that the email contents were false? As far as I know, Ravenman is correct, so we can’t draw conclusions either way from that. Another point besides authenticity to think about is context, or how the information is presented. The same set of information can lead us to draw very different conclusions based on how it is presented. I don’t trust that information derived from hacking is presented with complete and accurate context. I’m not saying that the information or context presented is necessarily inaccurate or anything to the like, but that they aren’t necessarily presented correctly either. That’s the inherent issue with information gathered this way: the information and the conclusions we and others draw from it should always be suspect. And the more the hacker(s) and releaser(s) have to gain from the dissemination of this information, the more suspect the information and conclusions should be in people’s minds. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/97 "2016-12-21T18:27:41Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The DNC is NOT the Clinton campaign, to state the obvious. Actually, it pretty much was. The DNC, which is establishment Democrats, picked Hillary, another establishment Democrat, as the heir apparent. Their chair was in the bag for Hillary - that’s why Donna Brazile fed Hillary debate questions while ostensibly serving CNN. And that’s partly why it resonated - the DNC’s cyber-security leaked like cut-rate Depends, which made evident that they were pushing Hillary, who also had a somewhat more than casual approach to cyber-security. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![up\_the\_junction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/f1d935/32.png) [@up\_the\_junction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/up_the_junction)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2016, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/98 "2016-12-21T19:01:17Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > It is a little amusing to see America get it’s panties in a twist because some foreign power interfered in it’s election and possibly installed a puppet. > > Sounth and Central America must be laughing their asses off, dotcha think? > > Karma’s a bitch, no doubt. > > (Of course I haven’t heard a single mention of how dirty America’s own hands are in this regard. But then…fake news…y’know!) yep, not to mention most of MENA - at least pre Arab Spring, and also Ukraine. But then to highlight the hypocrisy makes you a ‘Putin apologist’ or some such. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2016, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/99 "2016-12-22T00:50:07Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > My recollection was that they would not confirm or deny authenticity. “I can neither confirm or deny that I murdered my wife”… > [@HumbleThinker](#): > > As far as I know, Ravenman is correct, so we can’t draw conclusions either way from that. Yeah, it is pretty clear we can draw conclusions one way or the other. You have a list of people the mail was sent to and the person it was sent from. If this was a company and the boss didn’t ask the people involved whether they sent/received the email then it was because they didn’t want to know the answer. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765/100 "2016-12-23T04:24:56Z")
> [@asterion](#): > > Here’s my understanding of the situation: > > 1. A foreign actor (possibly backed by a state power like Russia) hacks the DNC email server. > 2. Separately, John Podesta gets phished and the contents of his email account are accessed. > 3. The contents are turned over a third party (WikiLeaks) outside the United States, who begins releasing the contents. Said contents are somewhat embarrassing but there’s no amazingly damning contents. > 4. Clinton loses, but there is no evidence that actual voting machines were tampered with or tallies changed by any actor foreign or domestic. There are arguments to be made about voter suppression in the form of caging, voter ID laws, and so on, but no one claims that the tally is inherently fraudulent. > 5. The conclusion on various liberal sites and in the parts of the media is now “Oh my God, the Russians have hacked the election! Trump is illegitimate!” Or even, “We’ve been attacked by Russia!” > > I just don’t see how those conclusions given in point 5 follow. Hacking of a private entity, while not in America’s interest, is not the same as hacking a government server. Dirty laundry was aired, which may have changed the mind of part of the electorate, but that’s not the same as hacking a voting machine. Everything I’ve seen tells me that Clinton was a bad candidate with a lot of baggage (some unfair, some self-inflicted) running a bad campaign in a year where enough Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents either stayed home or voted differently in key states while the Republicans turned out about the way they always do. > > So, tell me how I’m wrong. It’s not only the hacking a private entity but also the hacking a very public process – that’s the rub. But having said that, candidate Clinton threatened Russia’s national and geopolitical interests. Clinton’s policies would have been the same as Obama’s, which have attempted to impose crippling sanctions – and perhaps might have gone beyond that. Nobody here seems willing to acknowledge the fact that sanctions are acts of war. It’s just a matter of whether the country that’s being sanctioned can fight back. Iran, Cuba, Libya…maybe they can’t fight back. Russia can. Russia has. Russia will. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-i-be-outraged-by-russian-hacking/774765.md?page=6)