Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2017 20:53:09 GMT -5
The whole "Russians hacked our election" narrative trumpeted by the Democrats, after all the nonsense is stripped away, is nothing more than a de facto admission of the Obama administration's incompetence in matters of national cyber-security.
Funny, but the RNC's servers weren't hacked. But then, they had computer professionals running their network. At the DNC, it was amateur hour....again.
And never mind the fact that there is NO WAY TO PROVE, or even responsibly allege, that ONE SINGLE VOTER ever changed his or her vote as a result of this interference.
But the Obama-clowns are simply going through a laundry list of pathetic excuses. I sincerely hope they continue; they look more incompetent and immature every day.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 0:46:54 GMT -5
The whole "Russians hacked our election" narrative trumpeted by the Democrats, after all the nonsense is stripped away, is nothing more than a de facto admission of the Obama administration's incompetence in matters of national cyber-security.
Funny, but the RNC's servers weren't hacked. But then, they had computer professionals running their network. At the DNC, it was amateur hour....again.
And never mind the fact that there is NO WAY TO PROVE, or even responsibly allege, that ONE SINGLE VOTER ever changed his or her vote as a result of this interference.
But the Obama-clowns are simply going through a laundry list of pathetic excuses. I sincerely hope they continue; they look more incompetent and immature every day. That's total BS and you're just being biased. Look how smoothly Obamacare's website rolled out. And how much we learned when N. Korea hacked Sony. The changes we made when China hacked the DoD. Obama has been cutting edge on cyber.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2017 1:36:38 GMT -5
Ok, wait...so the Russians interfered with the election by hacking into democratic mainframe, stealing emails from hilary and her staff...and then the grand finale of the russian hacking scheme was hadning the info they hacked over to wikileaks so julian assange could slowly leak them onto the internet in order to expose the public to the inner workings of all the Democratic politicians??? With interesting glimpses into behind the curtain-type democratic party things including, but not limited to, manufacturing overseas wars as well as domestic race wars... rigging the election... selling weapons to the enemy... and running child pornigraphy rings??
That's quite the elaborate hacking/election derailment scheme, if I've got that all right...
glad it happened to be honest. "Knowing is half the battle..."
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 1:40:46 GMT -5
Ok, wait...so the Russians interfered with the election by hacking into democratic mainframe, stealing emails from hilary and her staff...and then the grand finale of the russian hacking scheme was hadning the info they hacked over to wikileaks so julian assange could slowly leak them onto the internet in order to expose the publice to the inner workings of all the Democratic politicians, with interesting glimpses into things including but not limited to, manufacturing overseas wars as well as domestic race wars... rigging the election... selling weapons to the enemy... and running child pornigraphy rings?? That's quite the elaborate hacking/election derailment if I've got that all right...glad it happened to be honest. "Knowing is half the battle..." I think this is a fairly accurate summary, but I have not seen any evidence of even this happening, and Assange says his leaks did NOT come from Russia, but from disgruntled DNC staffers. I'm also glad it happened.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2017 1:50:50 GMT -5
Ok, wait...so the Russians interfered with the election by hacking into democratic mainframe, stealing emails from hilary and her staff...and then the grand finale of the russian hacking scheme was hadning the info they hacked over to wikileaks so julian assange could slowly leak them onto the internet in order to expose the publice to the inner workings of all the Democratic politicians, with interesting glimpses into things including but not limited to, manufacturing overseas wars as well as domestic race wars... rigging the election... selling weapons to the enemy... and running child pornigraphy rings?? That's quite the elaborate hacking/election derailment if I've got that all right...glad it happened to be honest. "Knowing is half the battle..." I think this is a fairly accurate summary, but I have not seen any evidence of even this happening, and Assange says his leaks did NOT come from Russia, but from disgruntled DNC staffers. I'm also glad it happened. Well shit, apparently it's not just the internet, its real life...
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jan 8, 2017 2:43:21 GMT -5
Ok, wait...so the Russians interfered with the election by hacking into democratic mainframe, stealing emails from hilary and her staff...and then the grand finale of the russian hacking scheme was hadning the info they hacked over to wikileaks so julian assange could slowly leak them onto the internet in order to expose the publice to the inner workings of all the Democratic politicians, with interesting glimpses into things including but not limited to, manufacturing overseas wars as well as domestic race wars... rigging the election... selling weapons to the enemy... and running child pornigraphy rings?? That's quite the elaborate hacking/election derailment if I've got that all right...glad it happened to be honest. "Knowing is half the battle..." I think this is a fairly accurate summary, but I have not seen any evidence of even this happening, and Assange says his leaks did NOT come from Russia, but from disgruntled DNC staffers. I'm also glad it happened. And the funny thing is both the NSA and Kerry have alluded to it not being Russia too. Kerry was quickly shut up of course.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 12:40:01 GMT -5
If someone can convince me the Russians wrote, planted, fabricated emails, tampered with votes, intel, etc, I'll be extremely pissed. Thus far, there's a vague implication they may have helped leak out the info that the DNC was rigged against Bernie and the media was feeding Hitlary debate questions in advance, and there's no actual evidence that they were even involved in that. How is this a story?
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2017 13:33:39 GMT -5
If someone can convince me the Russians wrote, planted, fabricated emails, tampered with votes, intel, etc, I'll be extremely pissed. Thus far, there's a vague implication they may have helped leak out the info that the DNC was rigged against Bernie and the media was feeding Hitlary debate questions in advance, and there's no actual evidence that they were even involved in that. How is this a story? This is basically their only defense, but it doesn't seem to be what the Democrats are saying, since Obama is already on record admitting that the emails are real. Obama even goes on to explain that the emails aren't a big deal, they're just ordinary, everyday run of the mill politicial stuff. Nevermind the fact that the FBI determined the Russians to have hacked the Democratic mainframe before they even inspected the Democratic servers!!!!
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 8, 2017 13:55:23 GMT -5
...I've read that assange claims the emails came directly from a whistle-blower inside the democratic party.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 16:32:51 GMT -5
If someone can convince me the Russians wrote, planted, fabricated emails, tampered with votes, intel, etc, I'll be extremely pissed. Thus far, there's a vague implication they may have helped leak out the info that the DNC was rigged against Bernie and the media was feeding Hitlary debate questions in advance, and there's no actual evidence that they were even involved in that. How is this a story? This is basically their only defense, but it doesn't seem to be what the Democrats are saying, since Obama is already on record admitting that the emails are real. Obama even goes on to explain that the emails aren't a big deal, they're just ordinary, everyday run of the mill politicial stuff. Nevermind the fact that the FBI determined the Russians to have hacked the Democratic mainframe before they even inspected the Democratic servers!!!! During the initial investigation into Hitlary's emails it was revealed that "multiple parties" had hacked into her private server. Would fully expect to see China, Russia, N Korea, Iran, even some allies, as well as run of the mill super hackers like Guccifer et al. It's an open sieve. Wikileaks claims the source was inside the campaign and/or the DNC, not totally unlike an Edward Snowden leaking from inside the NSA when wrong doing is afoot. You're getting fed debate questions in advance, changing primary debate schedules to disadvantage Sanders voters, keeping classified intel on your fucking Blackberry yeah, someone in your camp might have a "WTF" moment and spill the beans because the goddamend beans needed to be spilled you incompetent, impossibly corrupt fuck sticks.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 16:35:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jamesod on Jan 8, 2017 20:34:17 GMT -5
The whole "Russians hacked our election" narrative trumpeted by the Democrats, after all the nonsense is stripped away, is nothing more than a de facto admission of the Obama administration's incompetence in matters of national cyber-security.
Funny, but the RNC's servers weren't hacked. But then, they had computer professionals running their network. At the DNC, it was amateur hour....again.
And never mind the fact that there is NO WAY TO PROVE, or even responsibly allege, that ONE SINGLE VOTER ever changed his or her vote as a result of this interference.
But the Obama-clowns are simply going through a laundry list of pathetic excuses. I sincerely hope they continue; they look more incompetent and immature every day. Aren't you conflating a number of issues? The DNC's servers are not under the control of the Obama administration, and thus the Administration would have nothing to do with the DNC's server's protections, correct? So, how does a hack of the DNC servers speak at all to the abilities of the Obama Admin when it comes to cyber security? And the DNC servers certainly shouldn't have matters of national security on them. Did they? I wasn't aware of any national security issues leaked as a result of the hack of the DNC emails. [To be clear, the Obama admin may in fact suck at cyber security. I have no idea and i'm not trying to argue with you about that.] As to your point about no way to prove the effect of the hack, I completely agree. I think it's ridiculous for any Democrat to say that the Russian hack and release of emails caused Trump to win. Just as it's ridiculous for any Republican to say the hack definitively did not help Trump win. And that uncertainty is exactly why the "Russia hacked the DNC to influence the election" should have nothing to do with whether Trump's win should be deemed legitimate. Of course it MUST be deemed legitimate. There is no other reasonable alternative - it's legit, move on. Instead, the issue of Russia hacking should only have to do with raising awareness going forward about tightening our defenses as re: future elections and future hacks.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Jan 8, 2017 21:51:29 GMT -5
Aren't you conflating a number of issues? The DNC's servers are not under the control of the Obama administration, and thus the Administration would have nothing to do with the DNC's server's protections, correct? So, how does a hack of the DNC servers speak at all to the abilities of the Obama Admin when it comes to cyber security? And the DNC servers certainly shouldn't have matters of national security on them. Did they? I wasn't aware of any national security issues leaked as a result of the hack of the DNC emails. [To be clear, the Obama admin may in fact suck at cyber security. I have no idea and i'm not trying to argue with you about that.] As to your point about no way to prove the effect of the hack, I completely agree. I think it's ridiculous for any Democrat to say that the Russian hack and release of emails caused Trump to win. Just as it's ridiculous for any Republican to say the hack definitively did not help Trump win. And that uncertainty is exactly why the "Russia hacked the DNC to influence the election" should have nothing to do with whether Trump's win should be deemed legitimate. Of course it MUST be deemed legitimate. There is no other reasonable alternative - it's legit, move on. Instead, the issue of Russia hacking should only have to do with raising awareness going forward about tightening our defenses as re: future elections and future hacks. They did have national security documents on them. Some of the classified stuff that Hillary sent (including I think the Keyhole data that set this whole thing off), was sent to people who worked for the DNC and their servers stored received e-mails.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 22:12:50 GMT -5
I think it's ridiculous for any Democrat to say that the Russian hack and release of emails caused Trump to win. Just as it's ridiculous for any Republican to say the hack definitively did not help Trump win. Which hack are you referring to? Please be specific. I'm not aware of any at this time.
|
|
|
Post by jamesod on Jan 8, 2017 22:43:31 GMT -5
I think it's ridiculous for any Democrat to say that the Russian hack and release of emails caused Trump to win. Just as it's ridiculous for any Republican to say the hack definitively did not help Trump win. Which hack are you referring to? Please be specific. I'm not aware of any at this time. The exact same one as the one to which cyber was referring in the post to which I responded, dickface.
|
|
|
Post by jamesod on Jan 8, 2017 22:44:29 GMT -5
Aren't you conflating a number of issues? The DNC's servers are not under the control of the Obama administration, and thus the Administration would have nothing to do with the DNC's server's protections, correct? So, how does a hack of the DNC servers speak at all to the abilities of the Obama Admin when it comes to cyber security? And the DNC servers certainly shouldn't have matters of national security on them. Did they? I wasn't aware of any national security issues leaked as a result of the hack of the DNC emails. [To be clear, the Obama admin may in fact suck at cyber security. I have no idea and i'm not trying to argue with you about that.] As to your point about no way to prove the effect of the hack, I completely agree. I think it's ridiculous for any Democrat to say that the Russian hack and release of emails caused Trump to win. Just as it's ridiculous for any Republican to say the hack definitively did not help Trump win. And that uncertainty is exactly why the "Russia hacked the DNC to influence the election" should have nothing to do with whether Trump's win should be deemed legitimate. Of course it MUST be deemed legitimate. There is no other reasonable alternative - it's legit, move on. Instead, the issue of Russia hacking should only have to do with raising awareness going forward about tightening our defenses as re: future elections and future hacks. They did have national security documents on them. Some of the classified stuff that Hillary sent (including I think the Keyhole data that set this whole thing off), was sent to people who worked for the DNC and their servers stored received e-mails. Get a job.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 8, 2017 22:50:15 GMT -5
Which hack are you referring to? Please be specific. I'm not aware of any at this time. The exact same one as the one to which cyber was referring in the post to which I responded, dickface. So a media-spun ghost hack that may or may not have ever taken place. Copy.
|
|
|
Post by jamesod on Jan 8, 2017 22:57:20 GMT -5
The exact same one as the one to which cyber was referring in the post to which I responded, dickface. So a media-spun ghost hack that may or may not have ever taken place. Copy. Did you have anything to say relevant to the point I was making in my post, which was that the Obama Administration is not responsible for the security of the DNC servers? Or were you just looking for a random quote to allow you to once again express the same skepticism you just expressed a few posts prior about the existence of a Russian hack?
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 9, 2017 0:18:45 GMT -5
The second thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 0:23:27 GMT -5
Is anyone arguing that they would rather have the information that was leaked remain private and all of us played like pawns? Why are we not happy that corrupt politicians were exposed as the deviant assholes that we always knew they were? Why are we debating who/what/why, when we should be applauding the person/group that made this public?
This is not a right/left thing either... we should have been equally as happy if Trump was caught with his pants down prior to the election, so we can actually vote on the truth and reality, not the facade that they put on.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 9, 2017 1:30:28 GMT -5
Is anyone arguing that they would rather have the information that was leaked remain private and all of us played like pawns? Yes, all of the easily offended special snowflakes with twizzlers for arms that vote democrat would rather that info had never been leaked.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 9, 2017 1:38:05 GMT -5
The whole "Russians hacked our election" narrative trumpeted by the Democrats, after all the nonsense is stripped away, is nothing more than a de facto admission of the Obama administration's incompetence in matters of national cyber-security.
Funny, but the RNC's servers weren't hacked. But then, they had computer professionals running their network. At the DNC, it was amateur hour....again.
And never mind the fact that there is NO WAY TO PROVE, or even responsibly allege, that ONE SINGLE VOTER ever changed his or her vote as a result of this interference.
But the Obama-clowns are simply going through a laundry list of pathetic excuses. I sincerely hope they continue; they look more incompetent and immature every day. Instead, the issue of Russia hacking should only have to do with raising awareness going forward about tightening our defenses as re: future elections and future hacks. Are you suggesting that maybe sending and receiving highly sensitive and classified government material with the same Blackberry that you use to play Mah Jong.... isnt a good idea??
|
|
|
Post by slaytan on Jan 9, 2017 6:48:44 GMT -5
Russian interference in our elections? Gave us Eisenhower, LBJ, Carter, and (at least in an indirect way), Clinton (China had a more direct role in that, in that the Chinese military funded his campaign... hmmm).
IF the Russians purposely sabotaged Hillary, it was because the DNC bit the Russian hand that feeds it by denying the nomination to Russian mole Bernie Sanders, who won the nomination unfair and unsquare. Russia made Hillary through Bill (who, like Bernie, spent a "mysterious" time during his formative youth in Soviet controlled territory doing who-knows-what), and then perhaps they ordered her to step aside and let Bernie carry the ball in from the 1, which she refused.
OR (and I think I have covered this angle before) Putin wants Trump in so he can do to Trump, what Stalin did to Hitler, which was to steer the world into war and then frame Hitler as being the badguy (Hitler did, eventually, become a badguy, but it is important IMO to note that Germany had been framed for many mass atrocities before they ever committed a single one. Until 1942/3 the German Army was at least as well behaved as the American Army has been in modern times). Putin may think that he can pull off some elaborate rouses to which Trump will respond logically and reasonably (based on false assumptions created by Putin), and stick his dick (and our dicks) in the meat grinder. ^Of course, that's a terrifying scenario. I'm banking on it not being so, but it's 50/50. When I consider how many high ranking CIA and government officials are most definitely under compete control of Russia, it raises to 55/45 in favor of WW3.
Also true is that it is just as likely that the whole story of Russia hacking our elections in favor of Donald Trump was actually cooked up by the Russians themselves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 7:41:40 GMT -5
The whole "Russians hacked our election" narrative trumpeted by the Democrats, after all the nonsense is stripped away, is nothing more than a de facto admission of the Obama administration's incompetence in matters of national cyber-security.
Funny, but the RNC's servers weren't hacked. But then, they had computer professionals running their network. At the DNC, it was amateur hour....again.
And never mind the fact that there is NO WAY TO PROVE, or even responsibly allege, that ONE SINGLE VOTER ever changed his or her vote as a result of this interference.
But the Obama-clowns are simply going through a laundry list of pathetic excuses. I sincerely hope they continue; they look more incompetent and immature every day. Aren't you conflating a number of issues? The DNC's servers are not under the control of the Obama administration, and thus the Administration would have nothing to do with the DNC's server's protections, correct? So, how does a hack of the DNC servers speak at all to the abilities of the Obama Admin when it comes to cyber security? And the DNC servers certainly shouldn't have matters of national security on them. Did they? I wasn't aware of any national security issues leaked as a result of the hack of the DNC emails. [To be clear, the Obama admin may in fact suck at cyber security. I have no idea and i'm not trying to argue with you about that.] As to your point about no way to prove the effect of the hack, I completely agree. I think it's ridiculous for any Democrat to say that the Russian hack and release of emails caused Trump to win. Just as it's ridiculous for any Republican to say the hack definitively did not help Trump win. And that uncertainty is exactly why the "Russia hacked the DNC to influence the election" should have nothing to do with whether Trump's win should be deemed legitimate. Of course it MUST be deemed legitimate. There is no other reasonable alternative - it's legit, move on. Instead, the issue of Russia hacking should only have to do with raising awareness going forward about tightening our defenses as re: future elections and future hacks. Goddamnit you made me look up the exact meaning of "conflate". But you're correct in that I am associating the past hacking into the DoD with the DNC's admittedly separate but similar vulnerability. They ARE separate problems, with the former more dangerous in the present and near future.
Nevertheless, the Obama administration IS responsible for national cyber-security, whereas the DNC is not. So China's hacking into the DoD is another failure that his administration "owns". It is fair to conclude, as I have, that it's just more evidence of widespread incompetence at multiple levels. Amateur hour.
|
|
|
Post by ocmmafan on Jan 9, 2017 9:37:51 GMT -5
Is anyone arguing that they would rather have the information that was leaked remain private and all of us played like pawns? Why are we not happy that corrupt politicians were exposed as the deviant assholes that we always knew they were? Why are we debating who/what/why, when we should be applauding the person/group that made this public? This is not a right/left thing either... we should have been equally as happy if Trump was caught with his pants down prior to the election, so we can actually vote on the truth and reality, not the facade that they put on. This is exactly my point whenever I am listening to the snowflakes claim this was somehow "unfair". That and Julian Assange, who no one has ever claimed lied about anything nor ever claimed his evidence was less than truthful, has already said it wasn't Russia. But who cares who it was? The only issue remaining is WHY Hillary Clinton and her staff that participated in one of the largest criminal conspiracies in US Government History were allowed to escape prosecution. That is still a giant stain in our political landscape that is 50000x more important than the "who" revealed all the unethical and criminal actions Hillary and team were part of. The men in Benghazi are still dead, Clinton still conspired with the media to dupe the weak minded sheep, the DNC still leaked questions to Hillary to give her an advantage - these are all FACTS we ALL know about and should still be talking about. We learned during this election cycle we have a huge population of very, very dumb and weak people. These are the same people that brought about the millennial generation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 9:51:04 GMT -5
I'm still waiting for a talking head or anyone at all, really, to tell me why I should start giving a fuck about "Russian Interference". Because at the core of any "interference" I saw, was truth being revealed. I don't care who the source of the hack was. I care about what was revealed. And the way the media is slanting this shit is sickening to me. Like we're supposed to forget all the stuff that was in the emails, and just be upset that some foreign entity pointed out how tremendously corrupt one of the candidates running for President actually was? Not that the candidate was corrupt, but that some foreigner was the one who pointed it out? And that's supposed to make me scared? That's supposed to make me feel all concerned? Because to me that looks like a foreign entity trying to show the American people how they are being duped by the people they are "choosing" to run the country. How is that a bad thing? HOW IS THAT BAD AT ALL? In seemingly unrelated news, but likely very related: I noticed that Drudge has been offline quite a bit lately due to DDoS attacks. I suppose that's Russia too? (LOL) Taking down a site with the traffic and defenses of Drudge requires some serious ability and hardware. Is it a coincidence that Drudge was listed as a "fake news site" in that atrocious "Google Drive Doc" written by an assistant professor at a non-accredited college, which proclaimed that Drudge was "spreading Russian propaganda"? And now- here's Smooth Barry's "retaliation" against "Russian hackers"..... I mean WHAT THE FUCK? The leftist MSM is sitting here saying that Trump is going to be "horrible for journalists", yet here's a situation where the most likely suspect in an attack on a news organization, an attack not designed to discredit them- but to simply try to make them cease to exist at all- is the current President's regime. January 20th cannot get here fast enough. I think I'm going to go over to Huffington Post and make fun of all the little bitches who said he couldn't ever win. I haven't gone back over there to laugh at them yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 10:03:41 GMT -5
Just look at this: Here is the front page of Reuters. (REAL NEWS) And here's Huffington (Fake News): All the people the left care about is stupid, celebrity bullshit. It's the top headline. Trump said Streep is overrated. BUT HOW IS THAT THE BIGGEST NEWS IN THE LAND? ?? It's on the biggest news if you're a pussy ass libtard who needs all your little small person rage justified. FUCK THESE NEWS ORGANIZATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 10:18:22 GMT -5
Ford, Fiat, Black and Decker, Carrier, Softbank, and many more have publicly come out to say that they have changed business strategies and are going to open manufacturing plants and invest in the US workers because Trump's policies are more business friendly and his regulation pull back is going to make it profitable again for them. How many everyday people even know about this? We are talking about almost $100 billion of investment already pledged to be spent inside the US, which the people spending have outright said it's because Trump won... yet we are talking about Russia, racism and trying to stop Trump at every pass?
Congress better step the fuck up over the next 2 years and pass every damn bill they can, because if they turn in to pussies and don't get shit done, the economy won't surge and the liberals will be out in force to get control in 2018.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Jan 9, 2017 10:52:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jamesod on Jan 9, 2017 11:30:24 GMT -5
Is anyone arguing that they would rather have the information that was leaked remain private and all of us played like pawns? Why are we not happy that corrupt politicians were exposed as the deviant assholes that we always knew they were? Why are we debating who/what/why, when we should be applauding the person/group that made this public? This is not a right/left thing either... we should have been equally as happy if Trump was caught with his pants down prior to the election, so we can actually vote on the truth and reality, not the facade that they put on. No one I know is arguing that, and I know a ton of liberals. I think one can be both happy to have learned exactly how fucking corrupt the DNC is while being unhappy at the thought of the Russians systematically trying to influence our election. Those aren't mutually exclusive opinions.
|
|