> Supposedly Obama knew for Months/Years... that Russia was trying to influence the election. And by his admission BEFORE the election, you could trust the resu

> Supposedly Obama knew for Months/Years... that Russia was trying to influence the election. And by his admission BEFORE the election, you could trust the results. Hillary has a well known quote that "If you don't trust the election results, you are a threat to democracy" (Paraphrased). > If the Obama Administration was worried about Russia influence in the election, why didn't we hear about it BEFORE the results that they didn't like? Why is all the outrage about Russia AFTER the election? There are two different things going on here, which the right likes to conflate. Russia influenced the election by manipulating voters' opinions, with means that many consider illegitimate (hacking). Nobody falsified the election results, by hacking or otherwise. When Clinton said not accepting the results was a threat to democracy, she was referring to that - specifically, Trump's claim that the election was "rigged" through voter fraud. And she did accept the results. Democrats today like to argue that Trump doesn't deserve to be president, but nobody credible is saying that the election was literally invalid and the courts should throw him out of office, or anything like that. Obama did claim Russia was trying to influence the election before the election occurred - on October 7. [1] It's true that he didn't do more in part because he thought Clinton would win, but he also didn't want to seem to be unfairly influencing the election himself. There are significant differences between Obama influencing the elections of other democracies and what Russia did: the Russian hacking was (1) covert, not overt, and (2) a violation of US law. Of course, you don't have to agree that those differences matter.