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

Tal Vez

(660 posts)
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 10:07 AM Aug 2016

Shouldn't it be a crime for Russia/Wikileaks to use altered documents to influence

our elections? Surely, Putin and Assange should be permitted to express their support for Trump, but should the American electorate have to put up with purposeful distortions of reality designed to deprive voters of the truth?

Russian Hackers Altered Emails Before Release to Wikileaks:

https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrumpSpam/comments/4uyih3/russian_hackers_altered_emails_before_release_to/

I think that a grand jury should investigate the Russian/Wikileaks campaign activities. I suspect that when the truth comes out, some of these activities will be found to be criminal.

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Shouldn't it be a crime for Russia/Wikileaks to use altered documents to influence (Original Post) Tal Vez Aug 2016 OP
It's a matter of jurisdiction. MineralMan Aug 2016 #1
Yes, I see your point. But, doesn't some of this activity take place in the United States? Tal Vez Aug 2016 #2
It is espionage. Demsrule86 Aug 2016 #3
I hate to think that Trump could be that stupid, but I suspect that you're right. Tal Vez Aug 2016 #4
Isn't it a crime to hack into a computer? LoverOfLiberty Aug 2016 #5
Yes to the first question; the second one is more complicated Recursion Aug 2016 #6
Certainly it depends on jurisdiction LoverOfLiberty Aug 2016 #7
Truth question. Buckeye_Democrat Aug 2016 #8

MineralMan

(146,254 posts)
1. It's a matter of jurisdiction.
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 10:20 AM
Aug 2016

U.S. courts have no jurisdiction internationally. That's the core of the problem.

Tal Vez

(660 posts)
2. Yes, I see your point. But, doesn't some of this activity take place in the United States?
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 10:29 AM
Aug 2016

Are there no Wikileaks operations or employees based here in the United States?

I know that the world is becoming a smaller place, but distributing altered documents is more than just expressing an opinion. I really wish that we could find a way to protect our country from foreigners who are engaging in what amounts ro a form of political terrorism. I am certain that I would face severe consequences if I had an office in Moscow and began distributing phony documents designed to disrupt Russian elections. Putin would never tolerate that.

I understand your point though and it's a good one. This problem is not simple to solve.

Demsrule86

(68,456 posts)
3. It is espionage.
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 10:31 AM
Aug 2016

Trump could be in trouble too...if he is colluding with them. Another poster said Trump seemed to know what was in the emails before they were released.

Tal Vez

(660 posts)
4. I hate to think that Trump could be that stupid, but I suspect that you're right.
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 10:38 AM
Aug 2016

I usually think of espionage as collecting accurate information rather than distributing lies and phony documents. The damage is certainly similar either way and a democratic nation should be capable of protecting the integrity of its elections.

I recognize that in a way Assange is already locked up in that he is dodging the rape charges by hiding in an embassy. However, he continues to be free enough to play the lead role in this Russian operation. Something should be done, but I'm not clear as to what it should be.

LoverOfLiberty

(1,438 posts)
5. Isn't it a crime to hack into a computer?
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 11:55 AM
Aug 2016

Isn't it a crime to publish classified information?

This is a criminal outfit no matter how you look at it.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
6. Yes to the first question; the second one is more complicated
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 12:30 PM
Aug 2016

Classification does not automatically give a legal responsibility to a random person who does not have a clearance.

LoverOfLiberty

(1,438 posts)
7. Certainly it depends on jurisdiction
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 12:37 PM
Aug 2016

but I believe that if you receive what you know to be classified information and you disseminate it improperly, you can be charged with a crime, whether you were actually cleared to receive that classified information or not.

Buckeye_Democrat

(14,852 posts)
8. Truth question.
Sun Aug 7, 2016, 12:45 PM
Aug 2016

"Should the American electorate have to put up with purposeful distortions of reality designed to deprive voters of the truth?"

I wish it wasn't the case, but we've had AM talk radio and FOX News for years.

I honestly wouldn't care so much about the right-wing attack machine EXCEPT for their frequent dishonesty! When people make appeals for the return of "The Fairness Doctrine" in our media, I'd argue that we more need of an "Accuracy Doctrine." Of course, it's then a debate of who decides what's inaccurate, what's an intentional falsehood, etc.. Ugh, it saddens me. I suppose that better education is the best counter-attack.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Shouldn't it be a crime f...