Honest question. If there is proof that Russia hacked the DNC,

[B2G]

but zero proof they hacked the actual vote, is there anything that really can be done about Trump assuming office next month?

[Lurks Often]

1. Changing the outcome is about as likely as you winning a $300 million dollar lottery

[True Dough]

5. I agree

It's wishful thinking.

[FBaggins]

2. Is there even a plausible claim that they hacked the vote?

So far all I've seen is what was already claimed prior to the election (that the wikileaks source was Russia).

[B2G]

3. No, but it seems like a lot of folks here

think it's grounds for overturning the election.

Hence the question.

[FBaggins]

9. It would definitely be grounds for overturning the election

Since it would be proof that the election results were inaccurate...

... But there hasn't been any evidence if that. Wisconsin is essentially done with their recount without even a little evidence of foul play, and there's no way to believe that Trump really won WI but somehow lost NC or FL and covered it up.

[B2G]

11. Hacking the DNC and Podesta doesn't mean the results were inaccurate

It mean it influence people's thinking, not tampered with how they voted.

[bettyellen]

4. So far, it's just voter data bases... and officials and party workers at various levels....

I think the direct financial connections of Trump and people close to himadded to the hacking are more important. Hope we get more of that info.

[B2G]

6. Josh Earnest alread said in his presser today

that they may never release any proof they have of a Russian hacking.

WFT? Why?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

14. Exactly

I'm puzzled as to why the info that came out on Friday via the CIA is such a big deal, given that the same thing had already been said, i.e., the Russians were behind the DNC hacks, and they were trying to influence the election.

I think the people who are screaming "RE-VOTE!!!" are just latching on to the latest desperate measure since the recounts didn't overturn any results.

[4139]

7. Actually they haven't presented proof that Russia hacked the DNC...

...they are convinced that Russia did it no proof yet.

[B2G]

8. I know. See my comment above yours. nt

[LisaM]

10. I think the issue is more what happened in response - by elected officials and the FBI.

I don't think they needed to hack anything. They wanted to create chaos and to disrupt the election process. The polls were generally running close, and a lot of voters were undecided. It wouldn't have taken much.

I'm more concerned that there was collusion with a candidate and a political party, and the FBI - and that people in the U.S. Senate, a once-venerable institution, knowingly sat on the information to influence results.

Actual hacking isn't even necessary if you can find enough other ways to depress or influence the vote.

[B2G]

12. Yeah, well our own media did that on a daily basis

on the run up to the election.

Everyone was trying to influence it.

[LanternWaste]

17. That's a great way to rationalize Moscow getting into the game via hacking.

"Everyone was trying to influence it..."

That's a great way to rationalize Moscow getting into the game via hacking. Love your narrative, little fella... it's both consistent and simplistic!

[B2G]

18. And true.

Think it's not? Did you sleep through the election?

Read back through the posts here about the media leading up to the election.

Then get back to me, big fella.

[Kingofalldems]

21. Just on a jury for your post.

You were accused of a personal attack.

BTW, this thread is very.....informative.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

13. I would like to know that as well

If it is true that Russians played a role in hacking/disseminating DNC e-mails and that it affected the election results, then what? That's the part I'm a little fuzzy on. I'd like to think that this would be grounds for a "re-vote," however since there's no mechanism AFAIK for this to occur, then I'm not sure that anything can necessarily be done to stop Trump's inauguration to the Presidency. Neither Lindsey Graham, John McCain, nor any other Republican would support a new election or replacement of Trump as POTUS. We are stuck with Trump for at least the next four years and we know that he's not losing any sleep over any of this- to the extent that he even believes that there's anything here. I always felt that, after the disputed election in 2000, George W. Bush should've formed more of a "unity government" and/or governed in a more bipartisanship manner but, of course, that didn't happen and I would expect it to happen even less under Trump. And, again, there won't really be any Republicans AFAIK whom would argue for it either. The best that we can probably hope for is that it lessens the legitimacy of Trump's win in the public eye and helps boost our chances of replacing him in four years (and a whole host of Republicans in two).

[kudzu22]

19. Even if we could re-vote

how do you make the public un-know the contents of the DNC emails? You can't uncrack that egg.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

22. True

But we've had over a month to see how awful Trump is likely to be as POTUS and probably at least a few Trump voters have "Trumpgrets", so it may balance out. Unfortunately, it's not going to happen.

[hamsterjill]

15. Overturning the election would be nice, but that is not my intent by hoping for a full investigation

I want a full and complete investigation. I'm not sure what, if anything, will actually be found, and I'm certainly not confident that something found may necessarily be made public.

But there is something there. There is simply too much smoke for there not to be some kind of fire.

It's important to me, as an American citizen, that we all feel that our votes are counted properly.

If anything that is unearthed in the investigation were to shed Trump-ass in a bad light, well, let's just say I wouldn't be crying any tears.

[HoneyBadger]

16. The game changer is that going forward

The public assumes that everything will be hacked. To some degree that will change the way that people communicate.

If you spent time in IT compliance like me, you already knew this.

Honestly the next Wikileak probably will be the text msgs of campaign big shots. People tend to be naive about texting and think that once it gets sent and deleted, it is gone. They will learn otherwise.....

If it is digital, assume that someone, somewhere has a copy.

[JCanete]

20. Not without a crisis of faith in our system, but then we already have that. The likelyhood

is that barring an electoral college upset(which will still be a total mess)or proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was election hacking or treason, our sitting president and DOJ, not to mention the GOP controlled Congress and Senate, will allow Trump to get sworn in as our next President of the United States. And frankly it may prevent a Civil War factionalization at our highest branches of power. On the other hand, Trump could do a whole fucking lot of damage to the checks and balances in our government anyway. Weighed against that, I guess we'll see.

[Exilednight]

23. It's impossible to hack a voting machine from a remote location.

Voting machines are not hooked up to the internet. You would actually have to physically be in the presence of the he machine.

There's no proof that's been made public that Russia hacked the DNC, but it's all but certain that it was them.