Essay On Hacking In The Election

Since the two reporters from The Washington Post were beginning to put together the entire story piece-by-piece, the government soon began conducting their own investigation. What the authorities did not know was that an inside source who had access to all of the FBI files, nicknamed “Deep Throat”, was secretly confirming information for Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward to publish in the newspaper (Crawford-Mason, Clare). It was not until 2005 when “Deep Throat” would reveal his identity as Mark Felt – the director of the FBI at the time of the Watergate Scandal (“The Watergate Story: The Post Investigates”).

According to Newsmax, “The Washington Post has assigned 20 reporters to look into every aspect of Donald Trump’s past as the presumptive GOP nominee seeks to become the next president of the United States, famed Post associate editor, Bob Woodward, said Wednesday.” Woodward is looking into Donald Trump’s real estate deals saying that “The New York real estate world is more complex than the CIA. Look, the job at The Washington Post has to be tell us everything about who the eventual nominee will be in both parties, 15-part, 16-part series, 20-part series, we want to look at every part of their lives and we're never going get the whole story of course but we can get the best attainable.” It was also said that the Post is working to get the essence of Hilary Clinton. Woodward does not believe that Clinton purposely tried to use her private email server to send out classified information. In another article by Newsmax, “Woodward called Hillary Clinton's connections to "pay for play" through the Clinton Foundation and the access she had given when she was secretary of state "corrupt" and something that voters should be troubled by. Yes, it’s corrupt; it’s a scandal,” Woodward told the "Fox News Sunday" panel monitored by Wednesday's presidential debate moderator Wallace, and referencing back Wednesday's

details to the press during the height of the Watergate scandal, especially to Washington Post’s

When Bill Clinton became the president of the United States of America some investigations took place when he was accused more than one thing. These investigations were the caused for his impeachment.

Many questions are still yet to be answered such as knowing if he has hired a lawyer, what laws he broken- if any, and where his life will be guided from this point out. Although Democrats and Republicans are indifferent on the situation, I believe involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation to help receive answers to questions that have still not been answered was the right decision. While Sally Yates faced consequences, such as losing her job due to being a female and speaking up in warning the house on Flynn being caught in a scheme that could cause blackmail, I can not help but wonder who knew what at this time in the

He said that he had no information about the so-called attack on the Joint Chiefs of Staff network but his company had discovered a large number of attacks against US national security agencies and commercial companies by a hacker group known as “Cozy Bear” which had clear connection with the Russian government.

The buzz in the air was breaking news. Broadcast on all three major stations CBS, ABC, and NBC. There is serious trouble brewing in the Soviet Union and that had the nation on edge. It seemed the Russians had captured two espionage agents from America and one of them was talking. No lip service here, this guy was coming clean with all sorts of information, names, locations, secret codes and other government topics, labeled under the cover of hush-hush. The FBI and CIA were in a shamble, there was the danger of a major conflict, a real possibility for some grave difficulty with the implication toward another world war.

By making false statement repeatedly, this decreases her reliability. Going further into the investigation, her office said that she gave the State Department “30,490 work-related emails on Dec. 5, 2014, and ‘chose not to keep’ 31,830 emails she deemed ‘personal’” (Kiely, 2016, p.1). There were so many emails that she had on her personal email that were work related. It has to make people wonder if those 31,830 deleted emails were actually personal. In addition, throughout this investigation, there has been many conflicting statements coming from the Clinton campaign, stating that her emails were deleted “before Clinton received a congressional subpoena on March 4, 2015” but the FBI concluded that the emails were deleted “‘between March 25-31, 2015’ — three weeks after the subpoena” (Kiely, 2016, p.1). The differing information from the Clinton campaign in an attempt to help defend Clinton has made the matter even more suspicious and

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin was one of the KGB’s (Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti, or in English, Committee for State Security) greatest spies. Actually Vladimir Putin’s KGB career was, at best, mediocre to terrible according to the KGB. Nothing in his background suggests his bad record. It could just happen to be that his assignments failed due strictly to random chance, then again, this is the KGB; are they hiding something about their current president? Maybe what they are hiding is that he was one of their greatest spies.

It all began in 1994, when former Arkansas State employee, Paula Jones sued Bill Clinton for sexual harassment, arguing that he propositioned her when he was Governor. A legal group working on the case in 1998 received an anonymous tip that the President had a relationship with Lewinsky, an intern for his Chief of Staff. The knowledge of this incident peaked their interest, since it could be used to argue this was a pattern of behavior. On January 7th, 1998, Lewinsky filed a sworn affidavit in the Jones lawsuit saying she had never had a relationship with Clinton, but she did not know that a close friend, Linda Tripp had been taping conversations with her about the affair. Five days after the affidavit was filed, Tripp gave independent counsel Kenneth Star 20 hours of taped phone calls. Star had been investigating the Clintons over a real-estate venture known as White Water. But the recordings allowed him to get permission on January 16th to investigate

Furthermore, the professor notes that Trump "came perilously close to violating the Constitution" with former FBI Director James Comey when it came to the Russian investigation.

The New York Times begins by stating that “As an independent counsel issued a fresh wave of White House subpoenas, President Clinton today denied accusations of having had a sexual affair with a 21-year-old White House intern and promised to cooperate with prosecutors investigating whether the President obstructed justice and sought to have the reported liaison covered up” (Clines and Gerth 1). Although the statement is true, minuscule bias can already be detected. By including the age of the intern, mentioning that the President may have obstructed justice, and implying a coverup, the New York Times seems to deem the President as a guilty party. Throughout the article, different parties are discussed and analyzed in their role in the scandal. Certain parties are treated differently in terms of tone and diction. This raises red flags, but, still, the information important to the situation is included. In terms of credibility, however, the article posses

And what’s really important about WikiLeaks is that the Russian government has engaged in espionage against Americans. They have hacked American websites, American accounts of private people, of institutions. Then they have given that information to WikiLeaks for the purpose of putting it on the Internet.” This is non sequitur fallacy Hillary had used during third/final presidential debate at Los Vegas Nevada. This is non sequitur because Hillary Clinton after commenting on the email issue, pivots into doubting the motive of the source and then concludes with the Russian political interference in American politics. This is a diversion and the conclusion does not connect with her reasoning on the question raised by anchor on the issue of WikiLeaks report of Hillary’s speech in support of open trade with open boarder. Hillary used this fallacy to steer away the initial topic of boarder control and to disapprove WikiLeaks authenticity and independency on collecting reports to show to audiences that she had not talked or showed support of free trade with open boarder. This is her strategic deceptive approach to show that she is

That is until federal agents found out that Trumps foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos, had been lying to them (Ward, 2017). Papadopoulos repeatedly told the F.B.I. that he wasn't in any contact with Russia during the 2016 election. To this day he was apparently still contacting Russia because someone there said that they would go and tell him some secrets about Hillary Clinton's emails and secrets (Waldman, 2017). The F.B.I. eventually got enough evidence on him to arrest him on July 27th. According to Vox.com Papadopoulos originally pleaded guilty to the charges, but did not formally announce this until October 5th. And even after the formal plea a special council member, Robert Mueller, somehow got it the court to keep silent because he didn't want the President's reputation to be damaged (Ward, 2017). Now that it has been uncovered everybody is aware that the foreign policy adviser that Trump had hand picked, went and lied to the F.B.I. and had direct contact with Russian higher-ups.

Presidential candidate Donald Trump talked about improving the relationship with Russia and Vladimir Putin seemed to send signals that he was open to such overtures. Unfortunately when Trump unexpectedly won the election the Russia collusion accusations have become the main weapon of the Democratic opposition against the new president. The liberal media went on the Russia probe binge that is not likely to go away any time soon.