Trump admits Russia was behind election hacking

Big_Lou

Big_Lou

Well-Known Member
Justin-case said:
You seem upset. Are you pissed?
Click to expand...
He's gone MAD lusting after Pin's cock....

choomer said:
Evidence.
If your house is robbed you usually have to let law enforcement examine the house if just for insurance purposes if not for clues as to who did it, how they did it, and where they might have gone after doing it.

It helps to look at a server to see how it was breached, how data was transferred, where or what it was transferred to, and all deleted files (as a good cracker will try to erase his/her digital footprints).
Contrary to popular belief, deleted data can be forensically read unless the media is physically destroyed.

If you're going to play in the digital realm you should know the capabilities of the "toys".
If you've heard of Snowden or Binney you really should read what they have to say. ;)
Click to expand...
^ See?
 
Big_Lou

Big_Lou

Well-Known Member
choomer said:
You describing anything to do w/ that "ding-dong" as a win explains so much.

You have any asian ancestry?
Click to expand...
Reported as racist rhetoric.

choomer
A person who is involved with the act of chooming. A child-man who remains in an adolescent state where physical touching is neither adult nor child. Choomers rely on masculine physical touching (pawing) to demonstrate their feelings. This physical touching becomes their distinctive display of self.
 
choomer

choomer

Well-Known Member
Laughing at internet morality monitors.

big lou

1. One who has no friends; tries to impress people online by making lewd jokes nonstop.
2. One who is not funny

Gee.....guess you can get whatever you want out of urbandictionary. ;)
 
choomer

choomer

Well-Known Member
Growdict said:
if you cant see why having a third party expert between you and the FBI could be beneficial, you are fairly stupid. Try to think outside of partisan lines for a second, do you think DJT and RNC would just hand over all their private computers to FBI if they had a breach? cmon, he wont even release his taxes. why? because it will make him look bad. Same with hiring a third party expert, you can control the information that gets released so you dont look bad. This is really a very simple concept.
Click to expand...
Yeah....don't let the little complication like starting international tensions with a story that this morning James Clapper had to come out and state:
"In his first tweet of the day, Donald Trump said at 7:23am on Thursday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper had called him to effectively apologize and "denounce" the "false and fictitious" report containing numerous unverified allegations about the president-elect and Russia.

"Made up, phony facts.Too bad!" Trump tweeted".​

Yeah...saving face for the DNC is WAY more important than international diplomacy.
 
Growdict

Growdict

Well-Known Member
choomer said:
Yeah....don't let the little complication like starting international tensions with a story that this morning James Clapper had to come out and state:
"In his first tweet of the day, Donald Trump said at 7:23am on Thursday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper had called him to effectively apologize and "denounce" the "false and fictitious" report containing numerous unverified allegations about the president-elect and Russia.

"Made up, phony facts.Too bad!" Trump tweeted".​

Yeah...saving face for the DNC is WAY more important than international diplomacy.
Click to expand...
1. you added apologize, Clapper did not take ownership of leak
2. these are completely different stories
3. you didnt answer my basic premise that having a 3rd party expert makes sense
 
Growdict

Growdict

Well-Known Member
choomer said:
Yeah....don't let the little complication like starting international tensions with a story that this morning James Clapper had to come out and state:
"In his first tweet of the day, Donald Trump said at 7:23am on Thursday that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper had called him to effectively apologize and "denounce" the "false and fictitious" report containing numerous unverified allegations about the president-elect and Russia.

"Made up, phony facts.Too bad!" Trump tweeted".​

Yeah...saving face for the DNC is WAY more important than international diplomacy.
Click to expand...
sorry, what country exactly did this start international tensions/diplomacy in? hint- USA doesnt count as international
 
Growdict

Growdict

Well-Known Member
it was the first google search that had a direct copy of the letter. now, answer the fugging question.
 
choomer

choomer

Well-Known Member
Growdict said:
1. you added apologize, Clapper did not take ownership of leak
2. these are completely different stories
3. you didnt answer my basic premise that having a 3rd party expert makes sense
Click to expand...
I quoted from an article which used the word

Effectively (the word before apologize):
  1. : in effect : virtually <by withholding further funds they effectively killed the project>

  2. : in an effective manner <dealt with the problem effectively>
So I didn't add it and it was essentially correct as commentary.

2. Both dealing with "intelligence" about Russia and the elections. They deftly demonstrate that the alphabet agencies have not displayed the best judgement or investigative ability and have been that way since a little suggestion that Iraq had WMD's was gifted to Collin Powell which was LATER proven to be false and indebted both of us to the Federal Reserve for trillions.
Don't you wish we all would have been a little more critical of that information at the time?

3. Your basic premise is that a private business gets to dictate (not corroborate or verify) case, evidence, and verdict instead of the state which is supposedly making the criminal case for hacking. 3rd parties are great for verification, but not origination (unless they happen to be the investigated).

Do I think Russia (or people in Russia) did nothing to sway public opinion, both legal and illegal?
Fuck no.

They are a major world gov't and I suspect them of doing everything history (and Snowden) has proven the US gov't to do (as with your salon post, the link to WaPo was convenient) over and over again, most recently in the Ukraine.
But there is no evidence of election machine tampering that has been found in the 3 state recount and this entire "the Russians fixed the election!" groupthink is based entirely on the unproven assumption that Assange received the DNC emails from Russia which both have denied and a 3rd party verified their statements.

Almost every other news of this type that has been publicized has been from an internal source (from Benjamin Franklin to Edward Snowden) yet this one is a "hack" (a crack is more correct) perpetrated by a foreign state?
Any CISSP knows that the former is a lot more possible than the latter (which is why my money is on Seth Rich).


I take back my Salon post as it was a knee-jerk reaction and not warranted. That can happen with google.
At least you cite your sources which is a great deal more than a lot of others do.

EDIT: This all about how they emails were published yet no one challenges their authenticity.
I personally think the content of the emails was a lot more important than how they were released.
 
Last edited:
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
choomer said:
I quoted from an article which used the word

Effectively (the word before apologize):
  1. : in effect : virtually <by withholding further funds they effectively killed the project>

  2. : in an effective manner <dealt with the problem effectively>
So I didn't add it and it was essentially correct as commentary.

2. Both dealing with "intelligence" about Russia and the elections. They deftly demonstrate that the alphabet agencies have not displayed the best judgement or investigative ability and have been that way since a little suggestion that Iraq had WMD's was gifted to Collin Powell which was LATER proven to be false and indebted both of us to the Federal Reserve for trillions.
Don't you wish we all would have been a little more critical of that information at the time?

3. Your basic premise is that a private business gets to dictate (not corroborate or verify) case, evidence, and verdict instead of the state which is supposedly making the criminal case for hacking. 3rd parties are great for verification, but not origination (unless they happen to be the investigated).

Do I think Russia (or people in Russia) did nothing to sway public opinion, both legal and illegal?
Fuck no.

They are a major world gov't and I suspect them of doing everything history (and Snowden) has proven the US gov't to do (as with your salon post, the link to WaPo was convenient) over and over again, most recently in the Ukraine.
But there is no evidence of election machine tampering that has been found in the 3 state recount and this entire "the Russians fixed the election!" groupthink is based entirely on the unproven assumption that Assange received the DNC emails from Russia which both have denied and a 3rd party verified their statements.

Almost every other news of this type that has been publicized has been from an internal source (from Benjamin Franklin to Edward Snowden) yet this one is a "hack" (a crack is more correct) perpetrated by a foreign state?
Any CISSP knows that the former is a lot more possible than the latter (which is why my money is on Seth Rich).


I take back my Salon post as it was a knee-jerk reaction and not warranted. That can happen with google.
At least you cite your sources which is a great deal more than a lot of others do.

EDIT: This all about how they emails were published yet no one challenges their authenticity.
I personally think the content of the emails was a lot more important than how they were released.
Click to expand...

nice meltdown.

now shut the fuck up and go back to posting the addresses of jewish families and claiming it's real news, neo-nazi.
 
dandyrandy

dandyrandy

Well-Known Member
Russia, China and north Korea are the only countries that I have not talked to someone on amateur radio. Don't be like Russia.
 
Growdict

Growdict

Well-Known Member
Choomer- I like your post, it is well thought out. I still disagree ;)

1. Whoever added apologize, it is incorrect because Clapper has denied it came from the Intelligence side. This information was already disseminated and some dealt with info already in the public domain.

2a. I will give you that the WMDs was a huge screw up based on a single source torture victim. There are only 2 things in recent US history that i was 100% against before they happened, Iraq War 2 and DJT.
2b. Tying the above with Russian hacking Podesta's email or Russia collecting possible incriminating evidence against Trump is a stretch and Trump is gaslighting as usual.
CNN ran a story that there was a report with such information, that it has been briefed to top administrators and they cannot confirm the authenticity of anything in it - All of which is true but DJT had a hissy fit.
Buzzfeed ran the story of a 35 page memo which if you read it sounds like all made up bs.

3. my premise is that private has just as good if not better hacking experts as FBI. any actual code or evidence found can be given in whole to the FBI without them having access to the entire thing. Again, would DJT give the FBI his computer if it had a copy of all his past taxes and foreign deals and pussy grabbing exploits. No, he would not.

4. You think the content of Podesta's emails are important? Cool, then Bannon, Manafort and Lewindowski should be forced to put all their emails into the public domain. Collusion between Clinton and her party is more important than Russia hacking the DNC and waging an info war to affect the outcome of the Presidential election? Bear in mind, in most democracies, the party just decides which leader to put on top of the ticket and they put up who they think has the best chance to win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top