Interesting. Discuss.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...termediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...termediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html
The real source of Wikileaks info?
- Thread starter MegaPoke
- Start date
Karma. It's a biotch. It bit Hillary Clinton smack dab on her pasty white thighs. Her own kind threw her under the bus because they know she is the most corrupt individual to ever run for president of the United States. Good read from the Daily Mail. I wonder if the original democrat operative source was Seth Rich, the young fellow who was found dead from gun shots to the back but wasn't robbed.
Last edited:
More plausible than Russian hacking. Hillary and her camp don't realize that some people still have their eyesight.
No kidding Guns..the flip side though is the longer they stick around and act like little babies the worse it makes the whole lot look. Same with the rodent in chief, if he gets some kind of guest gig on the tube he will continue to hurt the party of Jim Crow and Japanese Interment. The "R's" haven't been handed a gift like this in for freakin ever.....hope they don't screw it up! Guess I won't be completely happy though until McCain, Graham, McConnell and Ryan are gone.
All the liberals posters and pundits I've read recently have fully wrapped themselves in the CIA's claim of the Russians being the boogie man notwithstanding that many other agencies and the DNI (Clapper) can't find the "proof" the CIA claims they know to be 100% factual.
I am not putting anything past the Russians. However, until there is actual proof shown, it's all just speculation. Especially given what one of this board's cyber security posters has said in several posts about the difficulty in knowing who is hacking unless they are caught in the act.
The real problem is the abysmal way in which our government at all levels and in all agencies hasn't done much of anything to protect our networks from being hacked.
I am not putting anything past the Russians. However, until there is actual proof shown, it's all just speculation. Especially given what one of this board's cyber security posters has said in several posts about the difficulty in knowing who is hacking unless they are caught in the act.
The real problem is the abysmal way in which our government at all levels and in all agencies hasn't done much of anything to protect our networks from being hacked.
To be fair, I believe many of those other agencies, including DNI and Clapper, agree that Russia has engaged in intrusion attempts. The disagreement with the CIA comes in the claim that those attempts were directed at influencing the election for Trump vs. general intelligence gathering/destabilization.
I also believe the Russians try and tamper with elections and god knows what else. Why wouldn't they? They are the freaking Russians but the link between that and anyone's free vote is asinine. Democrats need their own Donald trump to blow up their party and they can't see the forest because of the trees.
They forget. We KNOW the Russians are the enemy. We AGREED with Romney when he said that and was mocked by the clueless community organizer. Now republicans are being made out to be commie red sympathizers.
They forget. We KNOW the Russians are the enemy. We AGREED with Romney when he said that and was mocked by the clueless community organizer. Now republicans are being made out to be commie red sympathizers.
This needs to be tattooed on every liberals head.
Be interesting to know what he meant by the US Intelligence being interested in the Podesta email information...hhhmmmmm
Further along this same discussion.
Why the outrage that a foreign country would try to influence the outcome of an American election? I would think that would be expected behavior. It is up to us as voters to educate ourselves on the subjects. The onus is on us in that respect. The onus is on the government to make sure the voting and counting process is legitimate. If some foreign entity attempted to manipulate that voting apparatus itself, yeah... bring it. Time to kick some tail.
But if the American populace is a collective victim of foreign propaganda, then we get the government we deserve. Just as if we swallow the scripted main stream news narrative hook, line, and sinker then we get what we deserve.
Influencing minds - totally fine.
Influencing the voting process - act of war.
Why the outrage that a foreign country would try to influence the outcome of an American election? I would think that would be expected behavior. It is up to us as voters to educate ourselves on the subjects. The onus is on us in that respect. The onus is on the government to make sure the voting and counting process is legitimate. If some foreign entity attempted to manipulate that voting apparatus itself, yeah... bring it. Time to kick some tail.
But if the American populace is a collective victim of foreign propaganda, then we get the government we deserve. Just as if we swallow the scripted main stream news narrative hook, line, and sinker then we get what we deserve.
Influencing minds - totally fine.
Influencing the voting process - act of war.
I hope the Trump justice department looks into that little matter and a host of others with great vigor.
Totally agree with the following addendum.....
Committing unlawful acts to obtain the information used to influence minds = something short of an act of war, but definitely not "totally fine"...even if the information unlawfully obtained turns about to be completely true and correct.
Pretty sure I specifically remember you on here in 2011 making fun of Romney over his comments about the threat Russia poses. Are you ready to admit you were wrong? That Obama was wrong? Your posts recently would imply it but I haven't seen an actual admittance. Has that happened?
Let's not lose sight that it was the content of the email which doomed Hildebitch--not who may have hacked her server or the DNC or anyone/anything else.
I wasn't here in 2011, but with the sycophantic finger wagging syskatine usually does, I'd wager on you being correct.
There is a difference between calling Russia our greatest geopolitical foe and being dismayed by attempted Russian interference with the election.
I am waiting for all the people who thought Romney was right to be concerned by Trump's stance on Russia.
Last edited:
Of course not. Russia hadn't hacked our election then. Korea, China, non-states, terrorism, isis, etc. all seem pretty dangerous too. I'm still not convinced they're our most dangerous enemy, particularly with Trump's apparent antagonism towards China.
But let's just assume I was wrong then and they really are our greatest threat. Should we trust Putin over the American intelligence community?
Well are they dangerous or not? So you believe Putin over our own intelligence agencies, but Romney was correct that they're our biggest threat? Are you willing to discuss this?
Both perspectives can be "right," but 1 is old, establishment way of thinking, Romneys. For all the wailing lately, you'd be forced to presume accuracy in his stance.
And a new view that you can still make good deals with someone you don't trust. Hell, making good deals with your "enemy" may make them less of one over time.
1. The view that you can still make good deals with someone you don't trust isn't really that new. "Trust...but verify". Oddly enough, an ancient Russian proverb popularized by Reagan.
2. Could your last sentence also apply to Cuban relations as well? I REALLY want to go to Cuba without any restriction when I retire.
Scintillating and enlightening exchange, boys.
Keep up the good work, Brownie(s).
I'll need a list of people who thought Romney was right about that. I thought it was stupid then, and it's stupid now.
Anyone want to cop to this? Has Romney already reached GWB status?
Last edited:
I guess so. I don't recall a single thread about the guy. I'm sure there were some - but he's as forgettable as McCain, Dole, Dukhakis, etc.
Just heard Assange on the radio today asserting that the leaks did not come from the Russians. Sounded like it was an inside job.
Bottom line, if Hillary and her cohorts weren't such morons this never would have been an issue. She arrogantly tried to do state business on an illegal unsecured email account.
Screw what Trump says, that skank aka Hillary belongs in prison. Go ahead and throw that Satanist Podesta in as well.
Bottom line, if Hillary and her cohorts weren't such morons this never would have been an issue. She arrogantly tried to do state business on an illegal unsecured email account.
Screw what Trump says, that skank aka Hillary belongs in prison. Go ahead and throw that Satanist Podesta in as well.
I understand that WL won't name their source, nor should they - but I think their 100% accuracy rep on their content would extend to statements made that may or may not one day be scrutinized for accuracy. The CIA has no such obligation.
Ok, explain how they hacked our election. Did they hack voting machines and change votes?
The media loves running with this because of their butthurt over losing. But Wikileaks has come out and said it was information provided by some with access to DNC emails who did not approve of the Dems fixing their own primary to make sure Hillary won.
Also, let's keep in mind it was the Dems very own words that worked against them. How dare their corruption be outed.
And what is so concerning about Trump's approach to Russia. I see someone willing to work with them. Hillary just wanted to send young men and women to die and possibly engage us in nuclear war.
1. I can see the default narrative as long as there's a republican POTUS: "The media loves running with this because of their butthurt over losing." In the previous 8 years I do not recall anyone dismissing the conservatives' political points because of "butthurt" and make no mistake - it's been 8 straight years of nonstop butthurt. But I've read the "butthurt" anthem on here at least 2 dozen times to marginalize any point made by non-cons since November. The reason conservatives are saying that is because it distracts from the substantive issues. Trump worked with Russia? Butthurt. Screwed up with the Taiwan call? Butthurt. Defrauded his students? Butthurt. Cheated vendors? Butthurt. Grabbed women? Butthurt.
2. They hacked dems and Trump's opponents (but not Trump! Why?) and strategically released the emails to impact the election. Call it what you want. It's a foreign power (used to be an enemy - now we love them) that is manipulating our election process. Was it you that said we've fought wars over attacks on private property? Maybe it was OSUGD. Either way, we'll fight a war if someone attacks American private property, but if they steal and hack... well, hell that's just life. At least if it's Russia.
4. Nobody on the right gives a shit about corruption. "Nobody' is a bit much... nobody that voted for Trump. He's the most corrupt mf'er to come down the pike since Richard Nixon. He has cheated, bankrupted, defrauded, bribed, assaulted, lied, done everything corrupt that could possibly be done. There's not one area of his life where he's been honest.
4. What's wrong? Russia is aggressive, violent and oppressive. Do you really need to ask that? Plus, they're making us an enemy by hacking political candidateS and campaignS and trying to manipulate our elections and they are trying to reestablish the former Soviet empire.
5. Please tell me your source for Hillary wanting to get us in a nuclear war, or even a war with Russia. What's that based on?
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE82P0JI20120326
Oh yeah, it's gonna be hard to match Hillary and Obama's strong leadership with Russia.
Oh yeah, it's gonna be hard to match Hillary and Obama's strong leadership with Russia.
Last edited:
Assange also said that if Trump's Administration does the same or similar to what Hildebitch and the dems did he is sure his "inside" source will reveal their misdeeds. While he wouldn't confirm or deny who his source was other than to say it wasn't Russian, he did in essence confirm the email came from inside the government.
Like others have said, in the 10 or so years and of the millions of documents they have harvested in Wikileaks not a one has been found in error.
Assange had a name for the brouhaha being drummed up by the dems. He called it Neo-McCarthyism.
