Why? Why would Anonymous release evidence against Rove?

[MannyGoldstein]

I have no idea as to whether Rove was up to vote-rigging tricks this year (although I'm totally convinced that the Republicans pulled something off in Ohio in 2004).

Seems to me that if it's true, and Anonymous *is* holding evidence, there's little upside to Anonymous releasing it:

1. Does anyone actually think Rove would be prosecuted for anything? He's in the Untouchable Class.
2. Revealing the evidence could also reveal evidence about how Anonymous works. Anonymous is distinctly *not* in the untouchable class. They're in the NDAA "we can put your ass in jail forever with zero interference from pesky 'laws' and 'judges' class".

[ProSense]

1. Be afraid. Rove is untouchable.

Be very afraid. Nothing can be done.

Dude's a genius!

[MannyGoldstein]

4. So when are the prosecutions of confessed war criminals scheduled to start?

I'll have my popcorn at the ready.

[cali]

6. and you can munch on your non-sequiturs along with the popcorn.

[msanthrope]

8. Stealing...nt

[MannyGoldstein]

246. Care to point one out?

Or apologize?

[ProSense]

7. Conclusion: No evidence should be presented because nothing will happen.

Let's all believe something happened with no proof. President Obama was born in Kenya.

[MannyGoldstein]

10. That's not what I said, is it?

I said that Anonymous would be foolish to release evidence.

[ProSense]

12. "I said that Anonymous would be foolish to release evidence."

Yeah, who needs it? Better to believe unprovable stuff!

[Sekhmets Daughter]

46. The age old debate...

Idealism v Pragmatism.... I don't think there have ever been any winners....

[bettyellen]

105. funny, because I think both camps here are being idealistic.

People have been fighting for more transparency in elections for years, for more accountability in the media, for DOJ investigations and nothing happens. I do think the pro- anonymous people are more pragmatic when it comes to how the justice system works in regards to whistle blowers.
Too bad people would rather have flame wars than work on a common goal of transparency in the voting process. I live in an area that has huge textbook voter fraud, blatant voter fraud for the last century. I know dozens of smart people working the polls (in shock at the shenanigans) who witnessed and failed trying to stop it. The FBI filmed (parts of it) it going on and nothing happened. They filmed voters going in an organized group from one polling place to another and voting three times. No one ever got busted. I don't bother talking about it because so many people wouldn't believe it until they saw it themselves. And they don't really care because it's all local stuff from school board to mayoral. But it is literally a text book case, and it's worked to keep our local govt fairly corrupt.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

155. I do believe you made my case...

***I do think the pro- anonymous people are more pragmatic when it comes to how the justice system works in regards to whistle blowers.***

As to voter fraud and election tampering....it's been going on since the very first election. In his monumental, so far 4-volume with a 5th in the works, biography of Lyndon Johnson, Robert Caro details the types of election fraud routinely carried out by Texas Democrats.... I'm fairly certain that the Texas Republicans are no better.

Meanwhile back in this century and this election...St Lucie County, FL missed the deadline for their recount...Allen West will be back in court and Florida's 18th district could be subject to a full recount in all three of the counties, or parts of the counties, through which his district runs. If, heaven forbid, a recount awards him the seat in the House there will be hell to pay. ...sigh....

[bettyellen]

173. one of my friends working the polls actually saw a local councilman

hand a brown paper bag to a guy and say, "here are the names of the voters". I was mad that she didn't tackle him, LOL. They Mayoral candidates father in law delivered a voting machine himself- with broken seals and a tally already on it- and pollworkers insisted on using it right away. A fire alarm was pulled closing the most important precinct (to the reformers) entirely during morning rush. It was royally screwed, and it was all planned.
We've had so many buildings rehabbed here and lots of others leave town, and they all still vote after all these years.
The pollworkers, mostly sweet looking old ladies, are in on it ..... they're family to the civil servants and teachers that profit from the system. For many years, they tried to convince me I was not in the registration book by showing me the wrong one. Personally, hundred of people's voter registrations that I and friends handled were tossed out. Had to run as many of them to the court the next town over to get court orders to vote. These things are always a multi prong effort. They will always try and find new ways to rig these things. Always have, always will.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

185. Yep

[Coyotl]

47. Karl Rove has Obama's authentic Kenyan birth certificate

and this Anon story is part of the false flag cover-up to distract from the conspiracy.
They DON"T want you to know the Obama has to do Rove's bidding because Rove has his real birth certificate.

Rove fixed Ohio to elect Obama! Problem is, the birth certificate is real paper, so Anon is completely helpless.

With your contribution of $1,000 or more, we can fix that problem and Save America from Karl Rove's evil control of Obama

At least 10% of DU readers would believe this were it not for the ROFL emoticon

[Sekhmets Daughter]

59. Now, now,

you'll hurt the feelings of DUers everywhere.

[reusrename]

84. Reality check.

Science does really exist. Global warming is not a hoax, evolution is a proven fact, and the primaries were electronically flipped for Romney.

This is the real world where facts matter.

[D23MIURG23]

107. Where is the evidence that Romney won the primaries by hacking voting machines?

Make with those facts that you are so big on.

In the mean time, don't conflate your favorite conspiracy theory with science. Those of us who actually do science don't deserve to be tainted by the association.

[reusrename]

204. Mike Collins has written articles with links to the proofs.

http://www.opednews.com/populum/pagem.php?f=Part-II--Rigged-Elections-by-Michael-Collins-121031-324.html


The proof is the official vote totals. They were electronically flipped and there's no denying that fact. You can download the official vote totals and check for yourself, as many have done already.

It'll be nice when they start teaching this stuff in high school.

[randome]

206. I don't know.

Comparing 2008 election to a 2012 primary and noting the discrepancies? I say, .

Plus, if they were so inept to leave such a clear pattern, they wouldn't be smart enough to have done this in the first place.

[reusrename]

214. First, no one is comparing anything; each instance stands on its own.

The thing is, when we go back and look at historical data, we find that there were instances that happened back in 2008, but no one was aware of it at the time.

As to the stupidity question about leaving evidence in the data, I'm pretty sure no one expected that to happen. Only it did happen, and there's no changing that fact.

The thing to focus on is the fact that the official results of all those races are published. Just by looking at the published results you can how many votes were flipped for each candidate. You don't need to look at anything else, just the published results.

There is more discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1665183

[D23MIURG23]

216. Thanks for posting that.

It does appear that there were weird things happening in the Republican primaries based on the analysis at your link. The problem I have though is that a case of this kind involves making the argument "there was an electoral anomaly, therefore the cause of the anomaly had to be vote flipping". It is possible to posit explanations for anomalies other than fraud.

I also wouldn't immediately assume that the share of the vote going to Romney would be independent of precinct size. If there were more large precincts in cities, and Romney was more popular among urban republicans, then that kind of dependance might be observed. The more striking piece of data in those articles was the optical vs touchscreen comparison, where touchscreen showed the trend and optical did not. If that were true across the board then there would be a compelling case that some failure (but not necessarily fraud) was occurring. The clearest example of this in the article is a comparison of Outagamie and Milwaukee counties, however Outagamie county is not densely urbanized, so the cited trend might legitimately occur in the later county without happening in the former.

A line of direct evidence, namely one rooted in a whistleblower testimony, conspiratorial communication or a leaked code for undermining a central tabulator tally would provide a compelling case that this phenomenon was in fact vote flipping. This is precisely what has been missing from the vote flipping allegations. It would also be nice to see the people who wrote the article above considering alternate hypotheses for these anomalies, and discussing why they should be dismissed.

[reusrename]

243. Sure, I understand that.

The fact is that the votes were electronically flipped. Why or how that happened is a completely different question.

The aguments could include inadvertant sloppy programming, or some other non-criminal causality, but I don't think there is a single programmer out there anywhere that would hypothesize that this type of accidental explanation is even possible.

The votes were electronically flipped somehow. That is something that we know happened.

[valerief]

100. Only the DUINOers. nt

[reusrename]

79. What exactly is it that you don't believe?

Don't you understand that the primaries were electronically flipped for Romney?

How deep, exactly, is your denial of facts?

Seriously, are you aware of the facts regarding the primaries this year?

[Coyotl]

135. Oh crap, another line of BULLSHIT being inserted into the mix to prove the bullshit

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Yeah, don't you know that the bullshit that happened in 2012 proves the bullshit in 2004. There is a causal connection. Never mind the time being inverted.

Sometimes the reasoning here challenges the usage of the descriptor. Where did you go to school, and to which grade did you matriculate?

Look up "understand"

[reusrename]

209. What the hell are you going off about?

I'm talking about facts which stand alone, separate from any kind of reasoning.

I don't claim to know anything beyond the facts. The fact is, vote totals were electronically flipped. That fact is evident by looking at nothing other than thhe totals themselves, and tells us nothing about how they got electronically flipped. In the primaries, each occurrance favored Roomney, another fact that is immutable.

So tell me me what you're so critical of. Can you do that? Obviously you see a flaw somewhere. Can you explain where l, exactly?

[sabrina 1]

116. I don't think you 'get' Anonymous.

[ProSense]

119. Oh, I get it.

Anonymous.

Now, what does that have to do with presenting evidence? Certainly, there's a way to do it without compromising the entity's anonymity.

Stuff like that happens a lot.

[sabrina 1]

128. No I don't think you do or you would not be demanding they provide evidence

Btw, have you demanded that evidence of War Crimes be presented in a Court of Law here in the US? We know there is plenty of it but airc, we have been told over and over that it is impossible to prosecute War Criminals, including Rove btw, in this country.

If the US Government refuses to present evidence, why would Anonymous be expected to do so?

[sabrina 1]

156. Let's all believe that in the US when evidence of War Crimes, Election

Fraud, the outing of CIA agents, Economic Crimes, something will be done about it.

Do you have some evidence that a single War/Economic at the top, those in charge, like Rove, other than Libby who never went to jail anyhow but had his sentence commuted, has even been investigated?

I love that Anonymous or whoever they are have drawn attention to Rove's Election Fraud crimes no matter how they do it.

Anything that reminds him that we know he's a crook no matter how well protected he is, is fine by me.

They got people talking about it. Now let those whose job it is start investigating these criminals. Until they do, no Whistle Blower should reveal themselves to a government that prosecutes Whistle Blowers while protecting War Criminals.

[Zorra]

224. They will be scheduled sometime after the DOJ investigates and files charges.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. As manny said, when is the war crimes trial scheduled to start?

[femrap]

37. He's

a hateful, thieving, back-stabbing, bullying, possibly murdering piece of sow excrement.

A genius? I guess this proves that our nation has been dumb-downed.

KKKarl's career is toast.

Michael Connell: another small plane accident. Now he might have been the genius, but KKKarl...

[rhett o rick]

64. No one is claiming what you state. Rove is as touchable as Oliy North or Scooter Libby.

No one is claiming "nothing can be done" as you so sarcastically claim. However, it is very unlikely that anything will be done. This isnt Rove's first time. He has a long history of conspiring and has yet to be prosecuted.

Anon has nothing to gain and everything to lose by cooperating with the "authorities" that most likely would like to neutralize them.

I dont blame you for not believing in Anon but I find it sad that you think you need to ridicule those that are keeping an open mind.

[ProSense]

85. "Rove is as touchable as Oliy North or Scooter Libby."

The Oliver North File
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/index.htm

Jurors convict Libby on four of five charges
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17479718/ns/politics/t/jurors-convict-libby-four-five-charges/

I'll take it. Where is the evidence?

[rhett o rick]

92. Oliy got a slap on the wrist and Libby got pardoned. Wow.

You may "take it" but it's not enough for me.

I want Bush and Cheney in prison and the evidence is there. There is a reason that these crooks arent prosecuted and it aint for lack of evidence.

[ProSense]

95. "You may 'take it' but it's not enough for me."

You're right, better to keep the evidence secret, let him get away with it and gloat the he got foiled...in secret.

Score!

[rhett o rick]

132. You dont think that Anon has evidence that the DoJ isnt aware of, do you?

Maybe you give them more credit than they deserve.

[sabrina 1]

168. Lol, the JURORS convicted Libby, and then what happened??

The people spoke and the ruling class took care of their own once again. Libby paid no price for his crimes.

[bahrbearian]

68. You seem to be spending a lot of time defending Rove, why is that?

[ProSense]

87. Please, try that cheap psychology on someone else. n/t

[bahrbearian]

89. I thought this was the DU, not American CrossRoads.

[ProSense]

98. This is the place where some believe evidence is unnecessary. n/t

[bahrbearian]

109. I think some proof would be nice, but your adamantly asking for that proof is curious.

[Hutzpa]

121. Pro, let tell it like it is..

it is a a cheap shot at reverse psychology.

[bupkus]

110. ProSense - you need to go back through the zillions of posts here throughout the campaign

That said just that.

"We'd better be careful. This could be another Rove trick!"

"We'd better make sure every single one of our details are perfect before we say anything! Rove might be setting us up again!"

Please. Rove is some kind of boogie man to Democrats. He stole elections before and he would have been happy to do it again. Judging by his reaction on election night he was convinced he had this one in the bag too. And the only reason you're so against the idea that Anon had something to do with stopping him for once is because you want to give all credit and praise to the Democratic campaign when you should be more grateful for an ally like Anon.

OCRA wasn't just a GOTV scheme. It was a vote RIGGING scheme. Why bother designing and running a complicated, expensive and effective ground game to get out the vote when you can just steal all you need?

[sabrina 1]

236. +1000% n/t

[cali]

2. Because they made a big claim without any evidence whatsoever

Yes, I believe that Justice would absolutely prosecute Rove if they had the evidence. do you really think this administration is out to protect him. Never mind. You probably do. I don't.

How on fucking earth could revealing code, expose Anonymous. They reveal shit all the time. That's their raison d'etre, right?

Sometimes in an eagerness to believe CT crap that conforms to their world view, DUers share common ground with wingnuts and freepers. It doesn't happen as often, but it happens fairly frequently and it's pitiful.

[malaise]

5. Rove made a bigger claim

and on live TV.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

54. Indeed he did...

consciously and unconsciously.

[Pale Blue Dot]

56. Yes, and he was proven wrong due to evidence.

Of which there is none in Anonymous's case.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

51. This administration protected

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, assorted CIA torturers (except for the low level fall guys) to name just a few. I think the issue is not that the administration would seek to protect Rove, but that many, many more resources would be enlisted in an attempt to track down ANON.

An analysis of Risk v Reward would err on the side of caution...a bit of bragging is one thing...turning over a creditable trail, something entirely different.

In reality, ANON doesn't need to be believed to be effective.

[Bibliovore]

80. I think part of the prior protection...

...stemmed from the initial belief that there could be some healthy bipartisanship in the new (Obama's first) presidential term, and that investigating/prosecuting the prior administration -- however justified! -- could jeopardize that. By the time it became all too painfully clear bipartisanship was never within reach, enough time and acrimony had gone by that investigations -- again, however justified -- would be trumpeted as hugely partisan and could jeopardize elections.

Maybe the investigations stemming from the Petraeus revelations can bring enough else to light to allow some movement there. I'm not holding my breath on that. However, I don't think the reasons for holding off on investigations for earlier potentially criminal actions hold at this point, and I don't think they'd prevent investigation of election tampering at this point.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

88. Perhaps,

but I don't think President Obama has any real taste for the battle that would ensue...and make no mistake, it would be a battle. Republicans would begin screaming that it is "persecution" "vindictiveness" etc. etc. etc. The nation is already divided almost to the breaking point. I'm old enough to remember when politics was much more civil and cooperative. I hope Gingrich & Rove suffer long and excruciating final journeys out of this life....They are responsible for much of the nastiness we now suffer through.

[Bibliovore]

103. Which do you mean?

Do you mean the battle from prosecution of Bush-administration war-related crimes, or of 2012 election tampering? Neither battle would be at all pretty, but I think there might be more current taste/tolerance for handling the election crimes. (I am NOT saying they're necessarily worse. They are, however, nearer, both geographically and temporally.)

Rove and Gingrich are indeed pretty awful. I don't wish pain on anyone, but I do wish they (and many others) would get the heck out of attempting to manipulate the United States for their personal ends.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

150. I was thinking of the nastiness of an investigation

into Rove and his operatives...or even election tampering in general. But who knows, I may be surprised.

[sabrina 1]

166. You don't protect war criminals for the sake of bi-partisanship. Anyone

who was willing to cover up war crimes for that reason is a criminal themselves frankly, they are not honoring their oath of office.

No that is not why they are protected. We know the reasons why now. We didn't when we once believed that this country honored the Rule of Law and that the Bush gang were an aberration who would be eventually be brought to justice. Few people are laboring under that misapprehension any more.

Whistle Blowers otoh, are assured of being prosecuted, a lesson to all those who might be tempted to present evidence of crimes among the ruling class.

[treestar]

96. This is much more concrete though

[Sekhmets Daughter]

99. Perhaps.

[Coyotl]

58. DU is populated by a lot of gullible want-to-believe new agers

The current mindscape is a fairyland of individuated reality nearly devoid of science and logic or of media propaganda where some consensuality intrudes. What do you expect of DU, other than to be a reflection of the prevailing idiocracy? Where did our education system go? How did we end up with such stupidity as a norm?

Why can't people see through a simple scam? What ever happened to critical reasoning? People just WANT to believe certain things, like glorious afterlife.

[Kingofalldems]

123. What an insult

Looks like you don't like DUers, which makes one wonder why you are here.

[Coyotl]

161. I don't like BULLSHIT

[Kingofalldems]

190. Apparently most of DU is bullshit to you

As a quick little search brings out. And add to the fact you think DU is populated by 'gullible New Agers', presented with absolutely no evidence. It's very clear now.

[HangOnKids]

191. But But But YOU STILL Post Here

What a comedian.

[WinkyDink]

133. YOU seem to want to believe you've made a cohesive argument (apparently while not grasping that YOU

are a member of DU).

[WCLinolVir]

244. What nonsense. "Fairyland of individuated reality nearly devoid of science and logic "

You are the antithesis of scientific thought. You would have held science back. In the dark ages. I'm sorry to be unpleasant but if the great minds of science had not been willing to theorize in the absence of absolute proof, and devised studies that take into the account unknown, or theorized factors, and were able to construct tests to confirm theories identifying the presence of that which is unseen, and gain a better understanding of what to look for and where to find it, then science would have stalled.. Much of the advances in physical science were accomplished this way. The ignorance of assertion based only on known factors , is understood to be a detriment to scientific discovery. We only know what we are able to test for. It does not mean we are able to test for what exists. The same may be said for your comment about the afterlife. Which I have experienced and you, obviously have not. Therefore, for you it does not exist. Guess what? Science is learning how to quantitatively test for such phenomena. I'm not going to point out the data or bother trying to convince you. Could not care less.
Math is a thing of beauty. The voter anomalies in the primaries speak for themselves. They don't need a belief attached to them. You can't dismiss something incontrovertible. Otherwise it's a bias.
The new agers have been saying things for decades that are very much in vogue in theoretical physics. Parts of which we can now test for. It just took some imagination to acknowledge our ignorance.

[sabrina 1]

118. Did Justice prosecute him for the firing of the US Attorneys?

Did this administration not put pressure on the Spanish Court to KEEP them from Prosecuting Bush War Criminals?

Lol, you must be kidding.

[cleduc]

3. Tough to use evidence obtained illegally against Rove, isn't it?

It would be great if they'd publish it so Rove gets convicted in the court of public opinion.

From there, maybe Holder could so something.

If John McCain is looking for something plausible to investigate ... (j/k)

[msanthrope]

11. Nope--as long as the government didn't steal it, 'stolen' evidence is perfectly fine

in a court of law. Much to my clients' wonderment....

[grantcart]

13. exactly

[Fumesucker]

23. Post #9 was claiming that Anonymous might be a government agency

[ProudProgressiveNow]

198. Strange but true! nt

[sabrina 1]

171. Rove will never be convicted in this country. It's far more like that the

Whistle Blowers will end up in jail, looking at the record.

There is plenty of evidence against War Criminals in this country but we are told we are 'not going to look back'. If only we would, Rove would be a part of War Crimes prosecutions, either as a witness or a suspect.

But the Ruling Class is protected here, and Rove is part of the Ruling Class, he has done so much to keep them in power they are not going to punish him for that.

[BlueCaliDem]

9. What makes you think any evidence Anonymous has gathered hasn't been sent to the DoJ?

Or to Holder or President Obama, personally?

For all we know, Anonymous IS part of the DoJ. Ever thought of that? OF course not. You loathe this administration so much that you can't attribute a single positive thing to them.

[Fumesucker]

19. So you're saying that secret police would be a *good* thing in your eyes?

[BlueCaliDem]

114. Never said such a thing.

But what makes you think we don't already have a "secret police" in this country? And who would stop them if they were created?

[Fumesucker]

120. Here's what you said, you clearly implied secret police is a positive thing

For all we know, Anonymous IS part of the DoJ. Ever thought of that? OF course not. You loathe this administration so much that you can't attribute a single positive thing to them.

[BlueCaliDem]

149. I didn't imply anything. YOU are implying I meant something I hadn't.

I posed a thought, a theory. Nowhere in my post did I agree with it or claim it to be positive. Follow the thread and you'll get a better understanding.

Sheesh.

[WinkyDink]

136. Since when is/are Anonymous acting as a police power?

[Fumesucker]

143. Don't ask me, it wasn't my idea

Something BlueCaliDem came up with from pasta only knows which orifice.

[D23MIURG23]

112. What makes you certain that Anonymous gathered any evidence?

Most of what I've read about Anonymous makes them out to be a bunch of teen and 20 something activists, who mainly specialize in denial of service attacks. Ever time I can recall them having done something, it involved an attack on some website who's publishers they took issue with. Anonymous may have spied on Rove's computing systems, but its at least equally likely that their message to him was a bluff.

As to whether Anonymous is a division of the DOJ, I present the following story for your consideration:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/13/anonymous-retaliates-after-member-arrested-by-fbi/


Tl;dr If Anonymous is part of the DOJ, then the FBI and the DOJ are covertly feuding, and the DOJ is publishing credit card details of "possible government agents" as retaliation for having their membership arrested.

Yeah, that is likely.

[BlueCaliDem]

153. There! See? I pose a scenario and it gets vetted.

This is what I mean. It stirs discussion.

I don't know much about this Anonymous group. No one does. For all we know, the people who came out as Anonymous against Rove and his many thieves this time weren't the same ones who have been catching headlines on all the blogs. Psy-Ops is an American government specialty, ya know, and the theft of another Federal election by Rove is serious government business.

Another thing that made me wonder . . . in Wisconsin, the Republicans won back power in their legislature, yet President Obama won the state. This, too, is odd unless, of course, we're ready to believe people split their ticket rather habitually in the state of Wisconsin and there's never been any ballots being found in old computers.

[jeff47]

158. People have been splitting tickets for 200 years.

It's absurdly common for someone to vote for a different party for President and Congress. For example, Reagan won a landslide in 1984. The Republicans didn't take Congress.

Splitting parties on the ballot is not at all odd.

[unc70]

217. In NC 2004, did black Dems split ticket Bush?

NC in 2004 had failures of nearly every type and involving nearly every vendor of voting and tabulating systems. Because many of NC's 100 counties in 2004 used touch-screen systems with no paper trail, voters learned first hand the worst that could happen - thousands of ballots from early voting lost without possibility of recovery because of a programming error. Not just nothing to recount, but nothing to count. It took 14 months for the last statewide race to be certified final.

Because several of the biggest failures, including total loss of ballots, were in majority Repub counties with Repub majority election boards, it wasn't just Dems who were complaining. Enough Repubs joined with most Dems to pass major reforms to our election laws.

We made a strategic decision to focus on the glaring problems that were not a partisan dispute. But we had strong evidence of vote switching that seems highly unlikely to have been by the voters.

The issues we saw were the 6-7% red shift on Election Day towards Bush while not affecting other contests. Exit polls did not detect such a shift. The shift only occurred for counties using specific vendors and systems.

Various explanations (Reagan Dems, etc.) fail to explain the 1 in 16 shift in some precincts with 98% of voters being black Dems.

Not absolute proof, but with many other anomalies, rising to the level if probable cause.

[jeff47]

219. So....time to change the subject when the argument isn't going your way?

This is why people get very tired talking to the voting machine conspiracy theory people. When your argument is destroyed, you suddenly change to another argument. In about a week or so, you'll be back to claiming split tickets don't happen.

This is why you can't get the discussion you claim you want.

[unc70]

225. Replying to your misleading response in other thread

Sorry I haven't been able to reply promptly to your misleading response in that other thread. I have little time at the moment since I am in caregiver mode for a family member who just came home from the hospital.

You seem overly eager to attack and attempt to discredit me and your fellow DUers, approaching libel. But don't worry, I not going away.

[jeff47]

238. So now we're on to the "can't be bothered" stage.

I'm looking forward to your next post, where you'll claim I'm now on ignore, so that you don't have to try and defend your previous arguments.

So....split tickets.....still never happen?

[D23MIURG23]

176. We know lots about anonymous.

Some of their membership have given interviews:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/insider-tells-why-anonymous-might-well-be-the-most-powerful-organization-on-earth/

http://blogs.computerworld.com/18307/face_of_anonymous_quits_exclusive_interview_with_barrett_brown

We have conformation of some of their activities:

http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/11/17/anonymous-takes-down-countless-israeli-sites-wipes-databases-leaks-emails-addresses-and-passwords/

http://mashable.com/2012/11/05/paypal-symantec-and-others-hacked-by-anonymous/

And as noted above some anonymous members have been arrested in connection with attacks. There is plenty about anonymous that isn't common knowledge, but we know enough to ask whether a hypothetical action is consistent with their demonstrated abilities, and whether hypothetical associations are realistic, based on their methods and organizational structure.

The way anonymous operates and organizes itself if very inconsistent with the way governmental organizations organize themselves. They are loosely affiliated with one another and have little or no central leadership. It would be unlikely for the government to start a fundamentally anarchic organization like Anon, although, I could imagine them trying to infiltrate Anon, and manipulate them with certain goals in mind.

[99Forever]

14. Ut oh Manny...

... ya mean Anonymous doesn't answer to self-appointed "inquisitors" making demands on an internet board? But they'll huff and they'll puff!

[ProSense]

17. "ya mean Anonymous doesn't answer to self-appointed 'inquisitors'"

Yeah, stupid-ass "self-appointed 'inquisitors'" wanting evidence. The nerve!

[99Forever]

22. Yes.

self-appointed inquisitors

I guess Anonymous isn't very impressed or intimidated by you and yours.

Maybe if you stomp your feet and hold your breath?

[ProSense]

27. Do you think Rove is impressed?

He's laughing his ass off at the notion that he's untouchable.

He lost $300 million dollars, the election, and got away with trying to steal it.

I'm really happy about the first two points, some people are elated that he got away with trying to steal the election. Yeah, frame it as a foiled attempt, but insisting he's untouchable and no evidence needs to be presented is likely sweet nectar for Rove. Keeps him in the loop until the next time.

[99Forever]

32. I'm tellin' ya...

... try rolling on your back and kicking and screaming!


That otta do it!

[Coyotl]

63. Try finding some evidence, any evidence, a tiny bit of evidence

just a smidgen, to support one tiny bit of the complex fabrication of daydreams, anything at all, try, try, if you know how

Good luck with that

[99Forever]

101. Why?

I care as much about what you "believe" as Anonymous does. Your "belief" is irrelevant.

[Coyotl]

138. How do you know I'm not Anonymous?

After all, if I just believe I'm Anonymous, I am Anonymous, right?

[D23MIURG23]

147. +1

[KharmaTrain]

15. Time For Sunlight...

Firstly...turdblossom and the rushpublicans showed their hands on the 2012 elections long before the first machine was rolled into a polling place...it was voter suppression. It's easier to keep them away from the polls than to get into various voting systems to flip a couple votes here or there...especially in light that BOTH parties claim the others have manipulated with the votes and were watching things very closely. Rushpublicans tried to change voter laws in key battleground states...that was their hope to game the elections in their favor and thanks to some heads up hard work by legislators and Democratic lawyers, most of those efforts failed. Those that succeeded were met with organized resistance as people waited upwards of 8 hours in lines to vote. It was another great example of people power and united citizens over Citizens United.

Yep...if there's proof that rover or someone else had a plan to manipulate machines and the vote...REVEAL IT! Expose it. Name names...let's get a name and face and possible indictment. If there's real voter machine fraud, shine light on it...time to end the cloak and dagger...make it visible and a catalyst for real change.

[RomneyLies]

16. they'll never release any evidence because their claims are pure, unadulterated bullshit nt

[HangOnKids]

192. And your credentials are?

Except for claiming to know it all?

[sabrina 1]

234. Lol funny, you don't know much about Anonymous do you?

Ever heard of H.B. Gary? They WISH your assessment of Anonymous was correct!

[Baitball Blogger]

18. Rove is vulnerable because the untouchables aren't going to protect him anymore.

[Raksha]

76. Good point - I never thought of that. n/t

[MineralMan]

20. They wouldn't. They don't have any.

They're taking credit for things they did not do. Since they're Anonymous, anything that works out, they can take credit for.

They are "legion," you see. They "never forget" to take credit for anything they can.

[RomneyLies]

25. ^^^ This ^^^ n/t

[Jennicut]

30. Yeah, I am with you on that one.

Rove is an idiot but I think he truly believed the Romney pollster Newhouse. They all made miscalculations on the polling on the Repub side calculating in a more white electorate and a lower minority and youth vote. ORCA was probably a piece of crap and crashed like Free Republic crashes. Look at the sophistication of Obama's operation compared to Romney's. Looking at it from our perspective after the election, it is surprising Romney and his team managed to tie their shoes correctly.

[Ikonoklast]

44. They also made all the Unicorns invisible.

And they can prove it.


Never saw a Unicorn yet, have you?

Yep.
Anonymous.


They claim a great deal of unprovable things...and I'm a Ninja!

[Coyotl]

66. At least one person sees through the logic. Thanks for making it so clear

Wow, what a coincidence, I'm a Ninja too

I could tell you are a real one because you know to capitalize Ninja

[MineralMan]

71. Ninja? I can see the whites of your eyes.

Hiyah!

[Ikonoklast]

124. You only *think* you're seeing my beady eyeballs.

I am clouding your perception with Ninja Jedi mind tricks.

As I watch from the ceiling above, you are attacking empty air!


Lamont Cranston ain't got nuthin' on me.

[AsahinaKimi]

231. Ninja are Japanese..

Everyone who is Japanese raise your hand!!!

[sabrina 1]

235. You sure do not know much about the history of Anonymous. I imagine

they are laughing their heads off right now.

Btw, ever heard of HB Gary? Among other victims of Anonymous?

[toddaa]

61. "They" being someone on pastebin

I'd be willing to bet that the whole "Anonymous hacked Rove" operation is nothing more than an elaborate trolling operation against DU, DailyKos, and firedoglake.

[Coyotl]

69. They took down Thom Hartmann too, big time. He's toast now, hook, line, and sinker

So, everyone donate more money down that velveteen rabbit hole.

[toddaa]

77. The Velvet Revolution has nothing to do with Anonymous

Like OWS or the Arab Spring, Anonymous merely jumped on the bandwagon. The only operation they can take credit for originating was Project Chanology.

[RomneyLies]

73. Your hypothesis is certainly more likely than the bullshit claims about "the Great Oz" nt

[sabrina 1]

227. Lol, I just love the fact that they are so successful at what they do best.

Seriously, you really don't have a clue about them, do you?

[Horse with no Name]

24. I agree with Prosense...I would love to have proof

I also agree with you. Rove is untouchable.

I am conflicted.

I believe Rasmussen and Gallup were in on it too--their "polls" were designed to give republican cover when the shit hit the fan on election night and the election went the other way. They have been around forever and, IMHO, both of these pollsters rolled the dice on cheating and lost. They lost all credibility and should NEVER be used again as important pollsters. But WHY would they do that? We know why. The fix was in but something happened.

The actions of Rove and Fux and Romney were of the extreme. More than "Aww fuck we lost"...it was deeper than that. SOMETHING happened, or better, didn't happen. But, who are they going to tell?

I certainly can believe that the hack was thwarted. However, I also believe that WE live on the side of justice and what is right. We are the ones with morals. We are the ones with values. They will lie, cheat and steal anything they can get away with. Which brings up the point. Most folks believe "Anonymous" = Democrats. We know that isn't so--they are also on the side of truth. We just happen to be two different players on the same stage with the same mission.

BUT, if anonymous came forward WITH PROOF that THEY were able to enter the voting process by computer...then, would it not be reasonable to assume that the election process was hacked? Even by the good guys, it still was hacked.

These republicans would rail on and on about the election being hacked until they got the SCOTUS to invalidate the election results. With the election being invalidated, they would be able to successfully conflate anonymous with the Democrats. So...maybe it is better to let anonymous keep their secrets and let us keep our POTUS.

One of those, be careful what we ask for....but again, I am conflicted because I, too, would like to see Rove hanged for treason. He is like Jason--he just keeps coming back and nothing short of death will remove him from the political process.

[ProSense]

28. Thanks, and it would go a long way

in proving that 2004 wasn't a fluke.

It would provide incredible closure, and possibly damage Rove for good.

[LiberalLovinLug]

145. I agree too....but with your other position

Republicans along with their buddies that actually own the machines, could release just enough evidence that the machines were hacked...by Anon, and claim private priority over any other data. Since it was Obama that won in the end, the onus would be on Democrats who would be lumped in with Anon, to prove they did not skew the tabulations towards their client. Even IF a government investigation was able to probe the machines and found evidence of tampering by RoveCo. as well, it would still mean a massive do-over.

The only benefit may be that there would be demands for greater government oversight and access to the software in future elections. Better yet a return to safe hand-counted paper ballots.

[graham4anything]

26. Anonymous should be in jail. Rove will never be convicted, therefore waste tax payer money

[WinkyDink]

130. And just WHY should Anonymous be in jail???

[graham4anything]

154. what she is doing is illegal and terroristic

[Rosa Luxemburg]

187. she?

[Baitball Blogger]

29. Why werent the votes recounted in the three counties that gave Bush the win in 2004"

Was it because there was no paper trail?

[Coyotl]

72. Where did you get that disinformation?

Since when did three counties give Bush anything except their vote totals?

OHIO 2004 WAS 3/4 PUNCH CARD VOTING. And, in the e-voting counties, the shift was for Bush and against Kerry. That is FACT!

[Baitball Blogger]

82. I got my information on the three counties from here"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251250674

[PATRICK]

31. Correct but

even if you take as a given no amount of evidence will provoke a reluctant DOJ even if sometimes it happens, it is a dam worth hammering away at with a real tool.

The most immediate value is exposure, especially of methodologies that can be seen, acted against by the common man in spite of the determined aversion of the MSM legal and political establishment.

Let everyone in on the game of fixing the fixers. The fear of individual small scale hackers on individual machines is about as real as voter fraud(although the GOP does that pretty openly). Internet vote scamming in particular should be easily disrupted or rendered a useless method of voting by real knowledge of destroying the inherently insecure process. Is it criminal? Is the vote process insecure? if someone can bring it out of the shadows for the common man it would have the "virtual" effect of hammering the the machines into metal scrap by mobs, only more civilized.

The best result of course would be to bring a legal end to this obvious farce of "modernized" voting, blinders on to institutional fraud. The second best result would be to put both spotlight and the kebosh on the sneaks by intelligent intervention. Both, if at all possible.

Each election comes out with a new version of cheating. This reliance shows defeat of real political influence is acknowledged.

[Hav]

33. For the same reason everyone else does.

You provide evidence for claims you make for the same reasons that everyone else is doing it: to back up your claims and to have credibility.

[99Forever]

41. Or what?

Will the Flying Monkey Brigade throw another impotent hissyfit?

You seriously think that those working in Anonymous give a shit about what some posters of this forum "believe?" The same posters, btw, that NEVER miss a chance to belittle and bash Anonymous.

Have at it.

[RomneyLies]

53. You seriously believe that Anonymous did what they claim they did?

I have a bridge to sell ya if you do.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. Actually it is very feasible under current technology

[Coyotl]

74. WHAT? Does someone actually believe that the video was Anonymous?

That video was a complete SHAM and FAKE of low quality at that, and obvious SCAM at best.

[99Forever]

139. Make shit up much?

Whether I 'believe" or not is irrelevant, just as what you "believe."

As to your bridge, I wouldn't want to buy the home over your head.

[D23MIURG23]

167. Of course our beliefs are relevant.

If Anonymous did not care what we believed about them, they would not release threatening videos publicly preceding their actions. They do that specifically, and in contrast to organizations like the CIA, to act on the beliefs of people like me. If they continue to send out videos claiming that they are going to do things that will have extraordinary impact on the course of history, and then failing to show any evidence that they did, they are going to devalue their own ability to be taken seriously, and cheapen their base of support. Only people like you will believe that they are a force to be reckoned with.

[99Forever]

178. Oh my!

Excuse me! I didn't realize you were so very very important.


I'm humbled.

[D23MIURG23]

182. At least you are consistent.

You don't think anyone's beliefs are important, so you don't even bother trying to make arguments.

What I don't get is why you are even bothering to write comments, if they best they can do is influence people's beliefs. Is if fun for you to pretend that you are engaging in a discussion?

[99Forever]

189. I'm more interested in the ...

... working of the man behind the curtain than trying to convince true believers that the "magic" isn't real.

War criminals are walking the halls of our government and NOTHING is done. Elections have been stolen and NOTHING is done. Our economy is stolen and NOTHING is done. Yet, I'm supposed to "convince" the sheep crowding in to the slaughter that they are being fleeced again? Yeah, sure.

[D23MIURG23]

193. OK, well in that case try harder.

You have to know what "magic" and "true believers" are first, so that might be a good place to start.

[99Forever]

194. WTF is that supposed to mean?

A petty attempt at a veiled insult?

Weak sauce, pal.

Good bye.

[D23MIURG23]

202. Thinking isn't your strong suit is it?

You are infuriated by people expressing skepticism and asking for evidence at the same time you call us "true believers" in "magic". Have you ever heard of a mirror?

Here is a hint, since you obviously, badly, need one: we don't "just know" that evolution and global warming are true. We accepted those conclusions because the available evidence is consistent with them. The people who don't have time for evidence on those issues are the deniers. Those are the people who think like you.

I have no more reason to accept your account of election fraud and anonymous as the defenders of fair elections then I do the denialist BS on "watts up with that", or the wild-eyed conspiracy theories about Illuminati bugged light bulbs from Alex Jones. That is the level you are on.

But don't let me bother you with my talk of evidence. You clearly have windmills dragons to be slaying. Be careful of the big tall ones with three blades, I hear those are extra hard.

[NYC Liberal]

111. Birthers and flat-earthers don't give a shit about what we say or believe, either.

But I won't stop asking to see evidence of their claims before I take them seriously.

Anonymous people can make whatever goofy bullshit claims they'd like, and they don't have to answer to anyone. On the other hand, rational people don't have to take unsubstantiated, unproven claims seriously -- nor should they.

[99Forever]

151. Oh noes!

You won't "take them seriously." I'll sure they are crushed.

[NYC Liberal]

175. I don't care how they feel.

Just like I don't care how birthers and creationists feel when I laugh at their nonsense.

[99Forever]

177. Apparently you do care.

Why else are you doing your best to try and discredit them? (and not getting it done )

You can't have it both ways.

[NYC Liberal]

179. I said I don't care how they feel. I DO care about people making extraordinary claims

with no evidence, in large part because others get sucked into it. Case in point.

Question: If a letter was released anonymously saying that Obama was born in Kenya and that his US birth certificate was a forgery -- would you accept it with no evidence or proof? Would you ask of anyone questioning it, "Why are you trying to discredit them"? Would you say no proof is necessary? Somehow, I doubt it.

[99Forever]

184. Again...

... this isn't about what I OR you care about or believe. That is irrelevant.

If I had the entire assets of the Department of Justice to work with and either had just plain failed to protect the People against ELECTION FRAUD being perpetrated yet AGAIN, I'd be spinning my wheels off too, to try and discredit the Private Citizens that got the job done when I couldn't.

You and your friends can squeal till you are blue in the face and Anonymous will still owe you absolutely nothing.

[D23MIURG23]

146. I think some of us give a shit about whether liberals look as foolish as truthers and creationists.

It weakens our cause to be associated with "clear eyed realists" who believe in unicorns and think evidence is for "the flying monkey brigade". I don't expect anonymous to care one way or another what people on this forum post, but that is a completely separate issue.

[Kaleva]

34. "In order for evil to flourish, all that is required is for good men to do nothing."

[Warren Stupidity]

35. Precisely. Anonymous operates outside of the law.

And bless them for doing so. They are not required to prove anything. Keep up the good work.

[femrap]

57. Finally,

a poster who gets it.

I had no idea there were so many that don't.

Don't they realize that our gov't is trying to get Julian Assange (stuck in an embassy in London) into our country so they can lock him up and throw away the key? Are they unaware of Bradley and his trial? That's what happens when people come forward. Get it?

Lots of posters need to do some googling and reading so they're capable of making an educated comment.

I respect what Anonymous is doing. Best of luck to them. It's about time that We, The People, who supposedly like the democratic form of government, have them on our side.

Years ago, it used to be the journalists of the nation that did Anonymous' job. Now with 85% of the MSM owned by five rich white dudes, true journalists are few and far between. They do as they are told or they're fired and blackballed.

Believe it or not, Faux News is relativity new on the scene. Murdoch was given US citizenship so he could takeover the media. We used to have Walter Cronkite. Now we have to have 'the real news' on The Comedy Channel.

Anonymous is serving a real need in this country....and in the world....exposing reality. And in this day and age, that's very dangerous. Remember Daniel Elsberg and The Pentagon Papers?? We don't have people like that anymore or the newspapers with the guts to print The Truth.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Because an anonymous poster on line demanded it

And Anon will immediately comply.


Snicker.

[ProSense]

38. Yeah, screw evidence! Still,

look at all the good that can come from having actual evidence:

Former BofA Exec Indicted For Fraud
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002990749

Three former UBS execs convicted of fraud involving contracts for muni bond proceeds investment
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021250815

The Justice Department just entered into the largest criminal settlement in U.S. history with the giant oil company BP. BP plead guilty to 14 criminal counts, including manslaughter, and agreed to pay $4 billion over the next five years.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021841131

Certainly, everyone here would love to see Rove meet a similar fate. Do you think that's possible without evidence?

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. Evidence tells anon

That nope it is not healthy...to turn against the powerful.

Snicker.

[ProSense]

42. "That nope it is not healthy...to turn against the powerful."

Yeah, screw speaking truth to power. Fear is the best medicine.

Be afraid.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Look, you still believe in life, liberty and the American justice system

Some of the people in Anon did not start living in the shadows last year. You probably miss this but the penalties for hacking (in this case ORCA) are quite serious, like of the criminal kind, some serious jail time level.

Unlike you, who can't understand this, they committed a real felony, they understand that.

So you want them to go to the Feds and offer evidence on Rove that would also be self incriminating? Are you serious? Are you like for real here?

I guess you are.

I usually do not recommend fiction, but pick up Neuromancer by John Gibson. Some of what is described there in fiction, describes what is going right now to a t. What you saw, assuming they did, is a hell of a net running operation.

[ProSense]

52. Only fear can save us.

"Unlike you, who can't understand this, they committed a real felony, they understand that."

Ludicrous cop out.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. There s more

The evidence was illegally obtained, so guess what? Rove walks. It is not admissible in court.

Go ask a lawyer, no serious. I am as serious as a heart attack.

This is not fear, this is this thing we call....reality.

Bruce Wayne gets away with being a vigilante since it s fiction. In real life vigilantes do not get away with it.

[ProSense]

65. "The evidence was illegally obtained, so guess what? Rove walks. It is not admissible in court."

Nonsense.

Reality is not fear and silly excuses. Claiming that the evidence cannot be presented is simply obfuscation to keep the conspiracy alive without accountability. Pure bullshit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. Go ask a lawyer

Anon, by it's very nature, is engaged in illegal activities and is doing this outside the law.

You think denial of service attacks are legal...for example?

[ProSense]

78. "Anon, by it's very nature, is engaged in illegal activities"

You seem focused on proving that Anonymous is breaking the law.

That has nothing to do with presenting the evidence. It's a non sequitur.

[nadinbrzezinski]

129. 5th amendment is not a non sequitur.

Serious.

[Kaleva]

83. The exclusionary rule does not apply to grand jury proceedings...

nor does it apply to evidence illegally obtained by a third party, Anon in this case, in criminal court cases.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=256&invol=465

[DirkGently]

91. They took down that PR firm without lawyers or courts.

It's a false premise to say nothing can be proven unless it's shown first in court. The entire premise of Wikileaks is that information, on its own, reveals truth.

If anyone could demonstrate, however "anonymously" that this occurred, it would stick.

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. The letter they released describing the process

is very likely doable under present technology.

So we could have a group of very knowledgable people writing a letter describing what they wished they did...but we know ORCA had issues all day that were consistent, at the very least, with a Denial of Service attack...so at this point we have circumstantial evidence that tells us something did indeed happen.

Whether it was an accident, coincidence, or anon hacktivists, your mileage will vary. My bs detector tells me that something did indeed happen, whether it was anon or not matters little...but the DDS did occur.

But demanding that a group used to the shadows, that might have committed a few serious felonies, that gathered illegally obtained info, come in from the cold is funny at best. I am giving them there the benefit of the doubt.

No, the problem is that some folks have an issue with the mere possibility that the US is increasingly a banana republic.

[DirkGently]

183. Believing w/o evidence is funnier

No one credible expects to be believed based on naked storytelling. Not even Anonymous. Evidence isn't as difficult as is being argued here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

188. Read the myriad of news stories

On ORCA's failure. That is quite a bit of evidence, or did the news run these stories to help Anon?

[DirkGently]

197. Oh, is there a story saying ORCA was a vote-flipping program?

I was under the impression the news story was about ORCA being a vote tracking program, not a nefarious Rove-ing of the election.

This is really getting silly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

207. You are right, it is getting silly

I said it is possible under current technology. You claim it is impossible... I guess white hats have gotten really bad and cannot penetrate a third grade operation, which is what Ars Technical describes the architecture of Orca as.

Also Ars Technica reveals that the ISP did indeed shut down inbound traffic thinking they were having a denial of service attack.

It could all be a nice coincidence, or really sloppy programming. For all I care, it could be a full moon as well.

By the way, related, or not. CNN did uncover two machines in PA that indeed were flipping votes on election day, on video no less.

You think CNN made that up too?

Now at no point did I say Anon did it... I just said it is POSSIBLE that something did indeed happen. And indeed we do know something did indeed happen.

But I am open to the possibility, given the EVIDENCE we hace and that includes Rove's reaction and melt down. Of course the last could be, oh shit, I just blew a few million dollars, shit!

But you are right, it is absolutely silly and nothing like this ever happens outside of a movie script.

[randome]

208. And at least one of those machines was recalibrated and put back into service.

2 malfunctioning machines out of thousands means...2 malfunctioning machines.

[DirkGently]

210. I didn't say it was impossible. I said lack of evidence isn't evidence.

Either you're responding to someone else, or you're trying to erect a strawman to back away from the truly stupid argument being put forward that Anonymous encountered blatant vote rigging, dismantled it, but doesn't want to provide evidence because ... corruption, or something.

[nadinbrzezinski]

215. Nah, not a strawman

So let me see

DOS attack and all inbound service stopped...

Problems getting credentials and wrong credentials issued.

Those are just two tantalizing pieces of info we know. They are just tantalizing. You think, let's assume this happened for real for a second, that the Romney operation wants this investigated? I don't. So there you have a motive of why it will not.

And Anon, well, they really do not have a motive to tell you more than they did.

It is was one of those that is truly a catch 22. I think, given present technology, that it is possible, given the series of coincidences. I am not saying it happened. Regardless, I do not think anybody will get evidence, unless extensive forensics are done on all systems involved.

[jeff47]

165. Illegal evidence is admissible if the government wasn't the lawbreaker.

If illegally-obtained evidence wasn't admissible, you could never have a co-conspirator testify against their group - they had to conduct an illegal act to get their evidence.

If the government conducted the illegal act, it's not admissible. If someone else conducts the illegal act, it is admissible.

[nadinbrzezinski]

170. And you think there will be this agreement?

I mean, really.

Also it is as a co-conspirator...alas that is not illegally obtained evidence. This...is.

[jeff47]

240. Try reading that again.

Let's say we conspire to rob a bank. We make plans, and rob the bank. We get caught.

You agree to testify against me in a plea deal, and explain our illegal plans and testify that we both conducted an illegal act.

Your testimony came from the illegal acts you perpetrated - conspiracy and robbery. Your evidence, that I was conspiring and robbing right alongside you, was gained while you were committing an illegal act.

You are arguing that you can't testify against me in that situation.

[sabrina 1]

239. You obviously have missed what happens to Whistle Blowers in this

country over the past number of years. Let's see, War Crimes exposed, yes. Criminals prosecuted? Zero. Messengers? Jailed and accused of treason.

Can you give us an example of just ONE prosecution that resulted from a Whistle Blower exposing crimes in that past, say, several decades?

Anonymous are not stupid. They are, I imagine, having a good laugh at the very idea anyone would think they are that stupid.

Regardless of what evidence they have or not, they have very effectively drawn attention to Election Thief Karl Rove and reminded people what a nasty, treasonous, criminal he is. And they have painted him into a corner. If he challenges them, HE will be asked for proof.

HAS he challenged them yet? Has he denied their claims? I am willing to bet he will not ever mention this situation.

[jeff47]

245. Example

Pull up your local police blotter. Any drug dealer that was arrested was likely outed by a "whistle blower" in the form of someone "trading up" from their crime.

Anonymous are not stupid. They are, I imagine, having a good laugh at the very idea anyone would think they are that stupid.

Actually if they're so smart, why not just post actual evidence instead of letters and videos full of strung-together buzzwords that don't actually make any sense?

they have very effectively drawn attention to Election Thief Karl Rove and reminded people what a nasty, treasonous, criminal he is

So all the people who busted their asses for Obama wasted their time then?

Good to know. We can all just stay home the next election instead of working so hard.

Oh wait, you did bother thinking through the implications of your latest favorite conspiracy theory, right?

And they have painted him into a corner. If he challenges them, HE will be asked for proof.

Because our legal system is guilty until proven innocent.

HAS he challenged them yet? Has he denied their claims?

Why would he? Their claims make no sense to anyone who actually knows a thing about computers and networks. The only people latching on to the claims are those who already believe he "hacked" 2004. So what benefit would Rove gain from addressing the claims of script kiddies that didn't actually do anything?

[sabrina 1]

122. Look at all the evidence of War Crimes there is, yet

when the Spanish Court was ready to prosecute Bush War Criminals this administration pressured them not to do so. Why do you think they did that?

And why would Democrats tell us to 'just move on' from War Crimes?

If you think anyone in this country is going to prosecute Rove, you haven't been paying attention. To when Congress issued subpoenas which he thumbed his nose at eg. Whatever happened to that btw?

Anonymous doing what they did was brilliant. It doesn't matter whether they have evidence, present it, don't present it. They did to him what he has been doing to others for decades.

[ProSense]

125. Yeah, good

"Anonymous doing what they did was brilliant. It doesn't matter whether they have evidence, present it, don't present it. They did to him what he has been doing to others for decades."

...thing the bankers and torturers don't have to worry about prosecution. We know what they're up to and now they have to look over their shoulders. No evidence or prosecution is ever needed again. This unproven claim is all we need.

[sabrina 1]

134. I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you being sarcastic or

stating facts?

We know what they're up to and now they have to look over their shoulders. No evidence or prosecution is ever needed again. This unproven claim is all we need.

Fyi, that wasn't the point of what Anonymous did.

As for looking over their shoulders, the US has protected War and Economic criminals so they do not have to look over their shoulders. Whistle Blowers are the ones who need to look over their shoulders in today's America.

Was Rove ever arrested for refusing to answer Congress Subpoenas? I recall a lot of hope that Federal Marshals would be sent out to bring him in, but the story just went away.

Whistle blowers are on the endangered list in today's US. I would not advise Anonymous or anyone else to risk their freedom to try to get justice re War Crimes, Voting Theft or Economic Crimes.

[Loudestlib]

39. This has jumped the shark.

[Coyotl]

43. Don't fall for that BULLSHIT story.

It just leads to a donate button, nowhere else

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. You know add blocker is a god send from the gods.

I will be installing on all machines.

[Change has come]

45. K & R

[Bluenorthwest]

50. One reason is the sake of their own reputation...

Someonetells me they caught a theif breaking in to my home, but they let him go free. How do I know they did not cut a deal with the thief to allow him to break in the next time?
This pronouncment that Rove is 'untouchable' serves Rove. And that makes me wonder about that backdoor deal for 2014 again. 'He is genius beyond the touch of anyone, above all governments' but he also has to take work as a FoxNews hack. Superpowerful, yet with degrading work done in public. Above all things, but in need of a weekly check. Currently hated by his former donors, but protected by them anyway....

[TheKentuckian]

93. What is there not to get about no having immunity from felony charges and reveling

your methods and placement?

I'm not into the "Rove is untouchable" aspect, though he may be or may have been. I don't think it matters to their calculation, what does weigh heavily is the whole not going to prison, selling each other out, and risk the entire operation for probably nothing. He just isn't really important other than until recently as a symbol.

Proof would almost have to mean a whole lot of who and how information and that means a very poor risk to reward equation as far as I can tell. I think I'd feel better with you being dubious that I stopped your house from being robbed than expose myself to prosecution while at the same time destroying my ability to stop robberies.

What difference does reputation make in the wheels and gears, really?

This is like the goofy argument of why does Batman wear a mask? The mask allows function in and out of the system. It allows you to keep being Batman without being Batman and nothing else.

It also keeps you out of a cell. Glossing this over is really dishonest to me.

[Bluenorthwest]

126. Other people have used the necessity defense.

Famous example being Amy Carter and 13 others arrested during protests against the CIA. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/16/us/amy-carter-is-acquitted-over-protest.html

And let me be clear, I'd not be dubious that you'd stopped the theft, I'd suspect you of collusion with the theif. Either to enhance your own standing or to make profit. If you simply stopped a robbery, why would you face prosecution? Why the fear if what you did was righteous?
I'm not sure how Batman operates, because he's fictional and all.

[sabrina 1]

152. Whistle blowers are a threatened species in today's America.

After watching over the past four years the number of prosecutions of Whistle Blowers, whose revelations were NOT investigated, see Bradley Manning and the war crimes he revealed eg, no one today in this country has any faith in Whistle Blower protection nor do they have faith that even if they are willing to go to prison, the crimes they reveal will be investigated.

This government pressured Spain to stop the prosecutions of Bush War Criminals. There is plenty of evidence of their crimes.

Anonymous plays with the heads of the War Criminals, and that is what they did here. Reminded people of Rove's many crimes none of which he has ever even been charged with.

[DirkGently]

55. Not plausible. Plenty of journos would run with it.

This whole "Anonymous saved Ohio" story is attractive solely because of confirmation bias. It'd be nice to nail Rove. It'd be nice if he didn't just fail, but was actively thwarted.

But the way to really damage a scheme like the one suggested would be to expose it. Inventing excuses for why none of this can be proven is mythology - logic.

If there's any meat on the bone, we'll hear about it. If we don't, there never was.

[cthulu2016]

67. Et Tu Manny? I can tell you why they *would* release evidence

The same reason they would tell the story in the first place.

To be believed.

It seems important to someone that a certain story be believed. Otherwise, why take the trouble of typing it and putting it out there?

They want to be believed, but no one who is not a true believer will believe their story without evidence.

And the subtler reasons to not provide evidence would go double for not saying anything in the first place.


So either they have a strategy of being believed only by a conspiracy choir, or that is the best to which they can aspire, since the thing is not true.

Sometimes there are reasons one would not provide evidence for an extraordinary claim, but the most compelling reason is that such evidence does not exist to be provided.

[ProSense]

75. Please,

evidence is irrelevant unless it guarantees prosecution according to the OP. Here we are on a Democratic site with some cheering for fog, proclaiming that transparency (and we're not politicians) is not good, that the best thing for our democracy is to keep the evidence that could damage Rove out of sight. He tried to steal the election...wink!

[Fumesucker]

81. You left out the ones who think secret police are a good idea

[DirkGently]

211. That's the central fallacy here. Exposure would be easy. If this were real.

Bragging's the MO of "hactivists." Data dumps. E-mail. Doesn't have to be legal, doesn't have to involve the cops.

It would be unethical to know of something like this and fail to expose it, or to rely on a cheesy video containing zero verifiable claims.

That's not Anonymous' style.

[Blue4Texas]

86. “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting,"Sun Tzu, The Art of War

[blue neen]

90. Anonymous=Tooth Fairy

Until they show evidence, that's the category they're in.

[treestar]

94. Why should we just believe them?

Any more than we should just believe Rove, or those who tell us what God wants?

[vaberella]

97. Unless there's a video or a recording---Rove is super safe. n/t

[robinlynne]

102. nor was the letter signed by Anonymous.

[boilerbabe]

104. and why would they hand this evidence over to the current party in power

who i am sure, in their eyes, has issues to answer for as well. partisan folks really have a hard time looking outside their warped filter.

[The Wizard]

106. This is all a nice diversion

The fact is the Republicans have moved into impeachment mode. The election didn't go their way, so now they'll concentrate on overthrowing a duly elected government. This has been their method of operation. Ask the Clintons.
Republicans are not normal. Can anyone name a normal Republican? Their greatest asset is lying on demand without compunction.

[Fire Walk With Me]

108. Members of Anonymous are currently busy punishing the insane government of Israel.

Many of their government and military websites are defaced or down. And:

Occupy Amsterdam ‏@occupyamsterdam

Breaking: Anonymous declares cyberwar with Israel: Details of Israeli Officials Leaked:
http://goo.gl/SNQCz |...
http://fb.me/1GQA7i8fP
Retweeted by uppity


Ξnǝmy Of The State ‏@BreaKBeatJunkee
Anonymous • Current Internet, telecommunication and death toll situation/status in #Gaza | #OpIsrael
http://crypt0nymous.tumblr.com/post/35841810469/current-internet-telecommunication-and-death-toll

[sabrina 1]

113. If Patrick Fitzgerald couldn't get him with all the evidence

they had, no one can get him.

I think a lot of people miss the point of Anonymous.

[PrMaine]

115. Is there Any Need for Anonymous to do More?

Assuming Anonymous has evidence, it is apt to be in the form of email messages. The Petraeus situation shows that the FBI can easily get the emails on their own if they want to pursue the matter that Anonymous has already alerted them to.

[NYC Liberal]

117. They may have reasons for witholding their proof, but with no proof their claims

should not be accepted blindly.

Now, if a person who is a known entity makes some claims and asks you to take their word for it, you MAY be justified in giving them the benefit of the doubt (at least for a little while) if they are reliable and have a good, proven history.

But we don't know who these people are. ANYONE can release anything they want anonymously. I could write up a letter, anonymously, saying I single handedly stopped Sarah Palin from detonating a nuke in Washington DC last year. People would rightfully laugh at such a claim with no evidence.

[WinkyDink]

127. To put Rove on more than just "alert." TO SCARE HIM for the NEXT TIME.

[SidDithers]

131. I hear Anon stopped Obama from cutting SS by 22% too!...nt

Sid

[sabrina 1]

137. So what do you think of Obama putting SS on the Deficit table?

Especially since it has nothing to do with the Deficit?

Btw, has he made a clear statement yet that it doesn't belong there, as Tammy Baldwin and Bernie Sanders have? We've been waiting.

[WinkyDink]

140. I hear Anon can't stop non-Democrats from posting on DU.

[Coyotl]

160. I'm glad I wore my waders to this thread

Last edited Sun Nov 18, 2012, 04:37 PM - Edit history (1)

http://static4.fjcdn.com/comments/oh+no...not+this+shit+again+_dd44d95a00d5b5232babcaebb1be8f2f.jpg

It is a bullshit war if ever there was one

[firehorse]

142. Why should anonoymous play by the "legal" rules, when those that they are targeting don't operate in

legal systems?

I see know reason for anonymous to show proof or evidence to anyone. The DU is not a court, they are not in court. And the games they are playing are with those who are above the court system. The system that requires evidence is for us: the underclass, the working class, the minorities, the 99%. It's there to keep us in line, not the rich and powerful who have the means to operate outside the system.

[Kaleva]

144. Did Anonymous actually make this claim or was it someone pretending to be Anonymous?

[Coyotl]

157. It was somneone doing a very poor job of pretending to be anonymous. Cheap vid at best

The cons have very poor, low-level talent in the imitation department

[DevonRex]

148. Hahahaha!

[Zorra]

159. It's obvious. Because the Third Way says so, due to the fact that they need

to use this as one of the many totally illogical strawman arguments they use in order to get more gullible people to believe their garbage, specifically, in this instance, that electronic voting is not dangerous to democracy, and that Anonymous does not act in the interests of democracy, fairness, and justice

The Third Way supports electronic voting. It is another device that helps to maintain the status quo of the Military Industrial Complex. They view both Anonymous and Occupy as enemies of the status quo Miltary Industrial Complex, and put forth as many stupid propaganda arguments as possible to keep gullible people in the flock that supports the dictatorship of the Banksters.

Good post, Manny, I don't understand why anyone would buy this dumbass Third Way argument.

"Duh, yeah! That's right! Why don't they release evidence? If they don't it proves they are full of bullshit!"

[sabrina 1]

162. Excellent post as usual. I am hoping that over the next two years

we can totally neutralize the influence of the Third Way in our Party and work towards ridding Congress of any of their puppets and replacing them with real Democrats.

They are a blight on this Party.

[ProSense]

169. I'm hoping that in the next two years

"we can totally neutralize the influence of the Third Way in our Party "

...that people who can't defend their arguments stop pretending everyone who values evidence and logic is Third Way.

Argument: Anonymous shouldn't present evidence because Rove is untouchable and torture wasn't prosecuted.

Yeah, I don't buy that. It sounds like bullshit, and frankly, I can't see any Third Wayer disagreeing with that argument.

[sabrina 1]

172. Well if you can present some evidence that War Criminals

including their propagandists like Rove, have ever been even charged, let alone prosecuted in this country, you would have a point. Worse, there is now evidence, which you say you respect, from the Wikileaks Cables that we did more than 'move forward' from War Crimes, this administration intervened on their behalf when the Spanish Court filed charges against them.

Rove is untouchable. They all are. Whistle Blowers otoh, are an endangered species. There is simply not denying all the evidence of these facts.

[ProSense]

174. What?

"Well if you can present some evidence that War Criminals including their propagandists like Rove, have ever been even charged, let alone prosecuted in this country, you would have a point."

What the hell does that have to do with evidence of a crime? Unlike the Anonymous claim, the evidence of the crime is there. In fact, the international community would love to get its hands on some of the players. That's never going to happen with Rove because it's best to keep evidence of his crime a secret, or so the argument goes.

[Zorra]

186. That's not exactly the argument.

The argument is this:

We don't trust the government to do the right thing because they have done basically nothing to address the problem of electronic voting, or public concerns about electronic voting. Having voting systems in place that can easily be manipulated, and with which there is no way to ensure accuracy, is only beneficial to the anti-democratic 1% who have majority control over our government.

You don't have to buy that; I don't know you, and for all I know, you'd like to see the folks who hacked out Rove prosecuted, or would like to see everyone who acts as Anonymous arrested and neutralized. After seeing so much hatred on this quote progressive website for wikileaks, Julian Assange, Bradley Manning, Occupy, and Anonymous, etc.,

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500690_162-4684431.html

I hate to be condescending, but you are not at risk here, and anyway, it does not really matter what you, or anyone else believes in this case, because it is what it is, and no identifiable individual is seeking reward or recognition, and unless your government does something about electronic voting, this scenario and debate will arise again in the future.

The founders of this country recognized that when authority becomes intrinsically corrupt, it becomes necessary for people to remedy the situation, by whatever means necessary.

It's much better to take care of these types of things non-violently, as simply as possible, don't you agree? No pain for the good guys; shock, anger, and loss to the bad guys.

Seriously, don't sweat it. Go Obama!

[ProSense]

201. "We don't trust the government to do the right thing"

How exactly is hiding evidence going to help?

I mean, how do you know that your leg isn't being pulled and the same shit you fear isn't getting worse?

Do you really believe the solution is simply for someone one to tell you anonymously that all is well with no evidence?

[randome]

203. You don't trust the government, the people you elect.

But you will trust in an anonymous letter.

I don't get that.

[Zorra]

229. So, like, did you trust George W. Bush and Dick Cheney? And how'd that work out for ya?

Anonymous letter? What are you talking about?

[randome]

230. An anonymous email.

Anyone can claim to be with Anonymous. Even me.

Of course I didn't trust Bush Jr. and his ilk. I also didn't trust in Fitzmas, if you remember that.

Without evidence, anyone can claim anything.

[Zorra]

233. So why are you implying that I should trust elected officials over Anonymous?

Anonymous has never lied to me, or injured me, as far as I know. Elected officials have done so repeatedly.

Yes, it's true, anyone can claim to be Anonymous. There is no organization, no leaders, and no membership cards.

Like Occupy, Anonymous simply is. There are no members, but many are Anonymous.

Anonymous needs no evidence, and could care less about anyone believing whatever they choose. Anonymous told you what was done. Take it or leave it.

No one who acts as Anonymous is going to lose any sleep over what people believe or don't believe. Anonymous cares deeply about those who were injured by what occurred. Maybe it would be best if they turned in the evidence? But it's pretty much a given that they're not going to do that, huh? LOL!

For some reason, it seems extremely important to you, and to many others also, that what Anonymous has revealed about stated intentions and subsequent actions not be true. That's OK. It won't change anything, and nobody's feelings will be hurt.

And all those other reported hacks and dosses that Anonymous has stated responsibility for?

Most likely not true either. Anonymous does not even exist.

It must have been the Boy Scouts.


Act Now!

[ProSense]

164. Wow,

Good post, Manny, I don't understand why anyone would buy this dumbass Third Way argument.

"Duh, yeah! That's right! Why don't they release evidence? If they don't it proves they are full of bullshit!"

...that's supposed to be a progressive argument?

I'm don't fucking belong to Third Way. I do value evidence and not speculative bullshit. Claiming that no one should provide evidence of a crime because it would do harm sounds a lot like "dumbass" Third-Way bullshit to me.

[NYC Liberal]

180. What's amazing is the argument that not only is providing evidence unncessary,

providing evidence is actually BAD.

Incredible. It goes to show that willful ignorance is not limited to any party or ideology.

[allrevvedup]

181. Yep.

Go figure.

[DirkGently]

195. Kind of like faith. The more it's not there, the more it IS!

[randome]

196. It sounds like people who still believe in Santa Claus.

They want to believe that there are shadowy forces for good to match the perceived shadowy forces of evil.

When the truth is that both sides are just dumb-asses.

Don't worry, people! Anonymous hears all your prayers!

[sabrina 1]

221. And once again you demonstrate a total lack of knowledge of

these issues. Do you really not 'get' Anonymous to this extent?

They sure started a conversation about Rove's criminal activities regarding election theft. I doubt Rove is pleased.

[randome]

222. Rove is irrelevant.

And anyone can claim to be Anonymous so you really have no idea who made this claim and therefore that there is anything to it.

Without evidence, some of us are hoping and praying that some shadowy agency will save us all!

When the truth is more complicated and less appealing -we won because of who we are and that's where we need to put our resources. Not into phantasms.

[sabrina 1]

226. BS, if YOU are hoping for some 'shadowy' savior then speak for yourself.

The rest of us are just having fun and it's even more fun to see people taking all of this so seriously. I am sure Rove is taking it seriously, keeps him on his toes.

There WAS a goal, no doubt, but the 'outrage' from some that Anonymous won't do what Congress refuses to do, is simply hilarious, and I have to hand it to them, their antics do out the snakes in our midst, which I am sure is not by accident.

[randome]

228. Are you calling me a snake? SSSSSSSSSSS.

There is no outrage from me. Disappointment that some believe in the authenticity of an anonymous email.

I have just as much authenticity as that so I can safely claim to have stopped Rove in his tracks. Yes. I...am...Anonymous.

[sabrina 1]

232. Like I said, you have very little knowledge of Anonymous.

And, I was not calling YOU a snake. If you knew their history you have known what I meant by that.

[Zorra]

242. It might be different if certain parties were more inclined to prosecute criminals

and less inclined to prosecute whistleblowers

I never said you belonged to the Third Way. It's just that your argument just sounds exactly like the dumbass Third Way argument about how Julian Assange should turn himself in, when they could care less about any alleged sexual assault, but they definitely hate him because of his whistleblowing, and the truth is they want him busted big time for pissing all over their beloved status quo, despite the fact that the status quo was clearly caught with its hands in the cookie jar in so many instances.

So...why do you suppose the justice system didn't do a damn thing about this little criminal oopsie posted below appropriately? :

Is the GOP stealing Ohio?
Uncertified, "experimental" software patches have been installed on machines in 39 counties of the key swing state

Questions still need to be answered here, dontcha think?

Anyway, the hack has been claimed by Anonymous. The public exposition of a crime, and the admission of a crime in response to that crime, has been made.

Gee, maybe someone should be investigating?


Or maybe they're not allowed to investigate; whoops, damage control time!

Hey, I know! Give Ohio SOS Husted a call with your concerns, maybe he'll call for an investigation! Well, maybe not. Probably not. OK, not.

Your apparent blind faith in the forces of American justice is...adorable. However, anyone who does not share this blind faith would never risk coming forward and admitting to a criminal act, even (or especially, in this case) if this act were done to thwart a much more serious criminal act. In circumstances such as this, in today's political climate, whistleblowers have a much greater chance of being prosecuted (see "other&quot than status quo criminals do.

Facing Grand Jury Intimidation: Fear, Silence and Solidarity

The Seattle grand jury subpoenas were served in late July, when the FBI and a Joint Terrorist Task Force conducted a series of raids on activist homes and squats in Portland, Olympia and Seattle with warrants seeking out computers, phones, black clothing and "anarchist literature." The FBI has stated only that the grand jury pertains to "violent crime," but it is believed to relate to property damage in Seattle during this year's May Day protests. The relatively small scale of the property destruction - a handful of spraypainted cars, slashed tires and smashed windows at a downtown Starbucks, Niketown, Wells Fargo and American Apparel store - in comparison to the cost of the police and FBI investigations points to the likelihood that the raids and grand juries have been widely dubbed a witch hunt, understood by commentators and activists alike as an attempt to intimidate, deter and undermine anarchists in the Northwest and beyond.

Go figure.

[DirkGently]

200. I think electronic voting is a danger & 3rd way is bullshit. But so's this theory.

It's an incredibly resonant bit of storytelling, because it incorporates all kinds of delicious ideas. We all think Rove is dirty. We all saw him act like his remote wasn't working on election night. Anonymous has been heroic a couple of times. So it's a triple-confirmation bias, at least. Quadruple if you throw in that it's Ohio, the center of previous talk about vote fixing.

But the logic presented in the OP and the thread in general is 911 - truther flavored. It's resistant to logic and insists that it be it disproven rather than the other way 'round. THAT is bullshit.

If someone -- anyone -- including Anonymous -- could prove this, they would. It would get out, it would be a huge story, and Rove and whoever else was involved would be destroyed.

Something could still come out that supports an idea like this, but it's extremely silly to suggest that someone who had the facts would not bring them forward. "Anonymous" could do it anonymously, for Pete's sake.

There's nothing third way or protective of questionable voting practices in general about observing that everything about the ORCA story smells like fanciful thinking.

[TheKentuckian]

223. Full disclosure, I don't claim to know what is going on.

I don't know if there is electronic cheating.

I don't know if Rove is involved with such things if they go on.

I don't know if there was a scam going in Ohio.

If there was a scam, I don't know why it failed or if it worked but not well enough.

I don't know if Anonymous was took any action, if there was something to respond to, and if they did I have know effin idea if they took credit.

What I know is there are too many questions that can only be answered with circumstantial arguments and who tells the best story when it is voting not some mystery beyond human understanding and discovery in our time.

I also know people have unverifiable and proprietary opportunity along with open motive.

I know I see about ever other manner of despicable shenanigans being used from street level all the way to the top.

I think the situation invites controversy and makes the quantifiable a factual mystery.
So no matter what one believes, it would seem cleaning this shit up would be very high priority. Even if you believe everything is above board and functioning well, you'd oppose willfully creating doubt in the institution.

The argument seems like a distraction to me, why have these questions?

[leftstreet]

220. +1

[2naSalit]

163. So how

does anyone know whether they have or intend to give evidence to the DoJ? Maybe they have, maybe not. The DoJ doesn't always act in a manner that placates the instant gratification mindset. And we don't know the half of what goes on in the unfortunately hidden from view functions of the criminal justice system, and I'm sure that Law and Order/CSI and the like are not the reality as something like this will not be solved in a 48 minute time frame with the guilty confessing after being rightfully intimidated by everyday legal sleuths.

For whatever reasons, whether that is to give notice to the "riggers" that they have been observed and that they may face the real consequences of their actions through legal channels or if they want the electorate to know that there may be forthcoming indictment with the intent to allow the electorate to actually demand that something be done remains to be seen.

It's only a couple weeks past the election and the folks who were in office prior to 11/6 are still in office. Perhaps there can be a big change in how things operate when the new batch of Congressionals and Cabinet start their jobs and perhaps then we will see whether his set of claims is real or not or just swept under the carpet again. Remember, it's not just the people in the chamber, they have lots of actuaries running around that we know little to nothing about and they could be anyone.

And hamRove is not in need of a paycheck from Ailes, he's there as a mouthpeice-weenie-waver to drum up the base and piss off the normal people just like Caribou Barbie. When he's outlived their usefulness, he will slink back under his rock to resurface another day when he is of use to these jackals and himself. (I'm thinking sNewt G. here, Mr absurdity personified.)

I think that a major reason the prez hasn't gone after the criminals of the past decade was that he was also under a serious threat from within that we may never know about but that may be emasculated by the end of January. Time will tell on a lot of these issues and squabbling about them here is of little value with regard to where we should focus our energy.

I think the upcoming Housecleaning and Cabinet wash will reveal a big change in how our revitalized prez handles things, at least that what I'm hoping for. Especially since a lot of embedded cockroach actuary type aides will go with them when they leave.)

[spanone]

199. in politics there is no such thing as untouchable. if you become toxic your 'friends' will piss on

you right alongside your enemies. rove could be a major urinal

[DirkGently]

213. A lot of the "establishment" would support crushing Rove.

Kind of magical thinking to imagine he's so powerful no one would take him down if the facts were provided.

Gives him more credit than he deserves. He's not the Bogeyman. He's an overhyped, rat-fucking operative, and this wasn't the first time he claimed to have "the math" and did not.

[bvar22]

205. Solidarity!

[Cleita]

212. Yes, and I'm amazed others can't see the logic of this. n/t

[TexasBushwhacker]

218. Isn't Turd Blossom toast now anyway?

The election proved that hundreds of millions of dollars of super PAC money couldn't buy the election, and IF it was rigged, it didn't work.

[MrMickeysMom]

237. I give them credit, regardless...

I wasn't born yesterday, so what do I care that I'd have to prove to one Karl Rove? He's detestable human waste.

[MrModerate]

241. How about, "Because the rest of us need to know how it's done" . . . ?

So that technical and procedural protections can be developed and put in place.

For the record, I think the Anonymous claim is nonsense, but if it's true, then they owe the world at least a hint of the methodology. And their techniques are not exactly invisible, just difficult to pin to a particular person or persons.