America's retaliation against Russian hacking.

@farmerman,

It's not a 'new norm'.

It's the old norm.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

What is that we are accepting? The media has corrupted itself so badly that they can no longer be trusted. So, media reports of what Russia may or may not have done need to be proven. Did Russia hack into some US computers? Probably. Espionage is a common thing for governments. We do it, they do it, lots of people do it.

There is no "giving it a pass", but what is it that you want to do about it? Assange has straight up said it wasn't Russia that gave them the DNC emails. Even the President says "Russia tried to influence the election." See the key words and absence of words in his sentence? "tried" and nothing about what they actually did. The Dems are all butt hurt about losing the election and are using anything they can find to try to stay relevant.

3 Replies

@McGentrix,

is Assange our new intell director?? Just wanna know how far youve swallowed this ****.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Assange has straight up said it wasn't Russia that gave them the DNC emails.

I'm sure you're willing to give Democrats the same benefit of the doubt that you're giving Assange. I mean Clinton said that she didn't take part in pay-to-play. So she must not have, right?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

The problem with your statement is that Hillary is a know liar and Assange hasn't been proven to be a liar. None of the information he has released on Wikileaks has been proven to be false, so he has a better truth rating than Hillary.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

The problem with your statement is that Hillary is a know liar and Assange hasn't been proven to be a liar. None of the information he has released on Wikileaks has been proven to be false, so he has a better truth rating than Hillary.

Assange lies, just like all of us.
http://gizmodo.com/julian-assange-lied-about-a-wikileaks-data-dump-on-nati-1785091653

Replace Clinton's name with some other Democratic politican's name then.

I'm SURE next time one of them says something that McG will give them the benefit of the doubt.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

This in no way invalidates the information that he has released. The info was correct and it figures you guys are mad at him now because he exposed the corruption in the DNC. If he had the same type of info on the GOP, you wouldn't care what he said, he exposed your enemies.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

This in no way invalidates the information that he has released. The info was correct and it figures you guys are mad at him now because he exposed the corruption in the DNC. If he had the same type of info on the GOP, you wouldn't care what he said, he exposed your enemies.

It does not invalidate anything. I don't care about the Clinton emails anymore.

I'm taking issue with McG taking Assange only at his word, in spite of the declaration of all of the US intelligence agencies that Russia was the source of the information.

You then said that Assange isn't a known liar, but in fact he lied straight up on video. I guess we can't trust him when he said straight up that Russia didn't send him the info.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

is Assange our new intell director?? Just wanna know how far you've swallowed this ****.

That's a silly question, of course he isn't. But, what ax does he have to grind? I mean compared to those that have decided to make an issue of this? It's weird that you protest the number of investigations against Obama and Clinton yet you can't wait to see Trump fail. I look forward to hearing it for the next 8 years. I had my turn.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

farmerman wrote:

is Assange our new intell director?? Just wanna know how far you've swallowed this ****.

That's a silly question, of course he isn't. But, what ax does he have to grind?

You remember when people said Clinton was going to have him assassinated? Wouldn't that be a pretty big ax in need of some grinding?

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

You guys started it ALL with your statements (from your porker in chief Rush Limbaugh) and Shanana Hannity who stated up dron that they were gonna see that OBAMA fails.
I really dont want Trump to fail because , unlike you, I recognize that it would have severe repercussions on our economy. Obama has done a pretty damn good job getting this country back on its feet and enjoying a new spurt of growth(despite all the non-support the GOP has provided). Now he hands it all over to an untreated ADD sufferer and we are supposed to feel comfortable??
You re more easily impressed than I

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

You guys started it ALL with your statements (from your porker in chief Rush Limbaugh) and Shanana Hannity who stated up dron that they were gonna see that OBAMA fails.
I really dont want Trump to fail because , unlike you, I recognize that it would have severe repercussions on our economy. Obama has done a pretty damn good job getting this country back on its feet and enjoying a new spurt of growth(despite all the non-support the GOP has provided). Now he hands it all over to an untreated ADD sufferer and we are supposed to feel comfortable??
You re more easily impressed than I

I don't want to see Trump fail either. I hope he goes back to his more democratic leaning positions he seemed to have into his 50's/60's.

That being said, I'm sure as sh*t going to make fun of all the Trump voters who don't get any of the stuff they were promised by Trump.

America is going to have to pay for that wall now, hahahahha

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

So we should just accept this as "the new norm" for our entire election process?

Face it: There isn´t a single thing Russians could do or refrain from doing which is going to help the democrats chances in future elections until they stop running gangsters and career criminals for high offices.

0 Replies

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-hacking-intelligence-20170105-story.html

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Assange didn't rule out a third party giving him the data and that is the route the Russians went, apparently it is the way they operate to leave deniability.

Officials say Russian hackers used third party

Quote:

United States intelligence agencies obtained what they considered to be conclusive evidence after the November election that Russia provided hacked material from the Democratic National Committee to WikiLeaks through a third party, three US officials said yesterday.

Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump voiced new doubts that Russian hackers attempted to influence the country's presidential election on his behalf, while WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said "a 14-year-old kid could have hacked" the computer of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

Assange, who was being interviewed in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, has repeatedly insisted that WikiLeaks' source for the emails from Podesta and the Democratic National Committee was not the Russian Government or any "state party". He did not comment on a third party.

Quote:

The report assessed with "high confidence" that the GRU, Russia's military intelligence agency, had used those intermediaries to release "US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks."

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has said he did not receive emails stolen from the DNC and top Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta from "a state party." Assange did not rule out the possibility that he got the material from a third party.

source

1 Reply

@revelette1,

Just so we have this straight...

A= Russia Hacked Podesta's email

B= Assange received Podesta's email files from someone other than Russia.

C= Third Party no one knows

You are saying that because A is true, that means A gave to C to fulfill B.

Could it be possible that D= Someone hacked Russian security and stole Podesta's email from them? An then D gave to C to fulfill B?

Or, is that just simply not a possibility because Russia had to give emails to Assange because that makes Russia the bad guy?

Could it also be that Podesta, being computer illiterate, allowed his email to be hacked by a common phishing attempt to steal his password? Then, the criminal that stole his password had no idea what they had and passed info to Assange because they saw $$ and the word government attached?

Also, how did the Ruskies know that Assange would even publish the material? He has a lot of stuff that has not been published.

It's just too convenient to say that Russia gave files to Bob who gave to Fred who gave to Julian. Who is the Third Party? Same as the guy on the grassy knoll or set the explosives off in Bldg 7?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Quote:

I hope he goes back to his more democratic leaning positions he seemed to have into his 50's/60's.

Yh, hes already stated changes of opinions on some of his "more conservative stances' that he began taking less than 4 years ago.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

The report will come out soon, it will be available online. I am sure those questions will answered and I am sure you will deny it. Why would all the intelligence agencies be having a conspiracy to frame Russia for the hacking of which WikiLeaks leaked to newspapers? What do they get out of it?

0 Replies

Pence says Trump will take aggressive action to combat cyber hacking

Quote:

"The president-elect has made it very clear that we are going to take aggressive action in the early days of our administration to combat cyber attacks and protect the American people from this type of intrusion in the future," Pence said.

0 Replies

I'm not surprised someone exploited the weakness inherent with liberal progressive democrats, just look at their leader - obama.

1 Reply

America's retaliation against Russian hacking.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know