Quote:Sorry, man, from our back-and-forth I thought you knew way more about computers than I did due to your work. Maybe you know way more because you're just plain smarter than me.
...
No big deal. I do know a lot about computers and networking both due to my job as well as for pleasure. I'm just not an "IT person". I happen to be privy to information that the MSM doesn't get from a few sources. Some of those sources are openly available if someone knows how to access them (hint - google is not really your friend in this case, unless you know what to look for).
I couldn't name a person or group responsible for the hack at this point, but what I can say is that there really isn't anything that gives definitive proof that the Russian government had anything to do with it. The main key that you see in MSM articles indicate that the attack originated from a server in Ukraine. The thing is, anyone can access a server anywhere in the world to carry out an attack. Just because an attack originates from a certain country or region doesn't really mean anything.
What is rather interesting is that the attack was not very sophisticated in the way that it was done. It was just simple
phishing that started it. Also, from the article that you posted further down in this thread, it sounds like the Administrator for the DNC's servers wasn't a very sharp person. I have met many ignorant "IT people" and Administrators that think they have their system "locked down" to the point that nobody can compromise it. The fact of the matter is, that the only true "hack proof" way to secure anything connected to the internet is to pull the power plug.
So the questions really are, did the hack influence the election? Perhaps. Once the stolen emails were released via wikileaks and the corruption within the DNC was exposed, it certainly could have swayed some voters. Was there an attempt to favor one candidate over the other? Not really. Had servers been breached at the RNC I'm sure that the data stolen would have also been provided to wikileaks. Can we say definitively that the attack came from a foreign government? Nope.
Quote:No big deal. I do know a lot about computers and networking both due to my job as well as for pleasure. I'm just not an "IT person". I happen to be privy to information that the MSM doesn't get from a few sources. Some of those sources are openly available if someone knows how to access them (hint - google is not really your friend in this case, unless you know what to look for).
I couldn't name a person or group responsible for the hack at this point, but what I can say is that there really isn't anything that gives definitive proof that the Russian government had anything to do with it. The main key that you see in MSM articles indicate that the attack originated from a server in Ukraine. The thing is, anyone can access a server anywhere in the world to carry out an attack. Just because an attack originates from a certain country or region doesn't really mean anything.
What is rather interesting is that the attack was not very sophisticated in the way that it was done. It was just simple phishing that started it. Also, from the article that you posted further down in this thread, it sounds like the Administrator for the DNC's servers wasn't a very sharp person. I have met many ignorant "IT people" and Administrators that think they have their system "locked down" to the point that nobody can compromise it. The fact of the matter is, that the only true "hack proof" way to secure anything connected to the internet is to pull the power plug.
So the questions really are, did the hack influence the election? Perhaps. Once the stolen emails were released via wikileaks and the corruption within the DNC was exposed, it certainly could have swayed some voters. Was there an attempt to favor one candidate over the other? Not really. Had servers been breached at the RNC I'm sure that the data stolen would have also been provided to wikileaks. Can we say definitively that the attack came from a foreign government? Nope.
Could just have easily been the Chinese government running a proxy through the Ukraine to make it look like Russia was in charge of it. Not saying that is the case just saying that the internet is a world wide communication devise that can easily be made to look like it came from certain parts of the world.
Curious, during the campaign Goldman Sachs was the devil and a talking point to discourage Ted Cruz supporters. So does it bother anyone that Trump has appointed two Goldman Sachs executives to key positions?
Are they not the devil anymore, or is it ok becuase Trump?
I'm a bit worried that Trump is not interested in reducing government only changing government, that has always been my hesitation. Who is he appointing to reign government in?
I fear we will now experience rapid federal growth in the name of populism, if both parties are going to try and better each other at growing the fed then all hope is lost.
Not to get all tin foil hat about the CIA. But.... it's the CIA. It's not like they've never engaged or acted with rogue intentions before both domestically and foreign. This is just an early attempt at false flagging Russia into the mainstream and public eye here to get the people's approval to punish Russia. And it's pretty pathetic. It's okay for us to go into virtually every other country on the planet and rile them all up but it's not cool, whether true or false, for another country to try that on us in defense?
I find it even more bothersome that people are upset about this yet don't even bat an eye at the fact that Saudi Arabia contributed 20% or roughly in the upwards of $100M during Hilary Clinton's campaign. It's even more troublesome when you consider that their country probably had more to do with the events of 9/11 more than Iraq or Afghanistan.
And meanwhile, the MSM just laughs off Pizzagate like it's a giant hoax. Yet you can see the odd terminology used in emails between Podesta revolving around "parties" for Obama and Clinton and it's beyond disturbing. Then you can look at all the freaky stuff the owner of Comet Pizza had all over his instagram that clearly indicated he's into some sick and twisted behavior.
Quote:Curious, during the campaign Goldman Sachs was the devil and a talking point to discourage Ted Cruz supporters. So does it bother anyone that Trump has appointed two Goldman Sachs executives to key positions?
Are they not the devil anymore, or is it ok becuase Trump?
I'm a bit worried that Trump is not interested in reducing government only changing government, that has always been my hesitation. Who is he appointing to reign government in?
I fear we will now experience rapid federal growth in the name of populism, if both parties are going to try and better each other at growing the fed then all hope is lost.
They are still bad, but they don't have the kind of influence on Trump that, say, Citigroup had on Obama. Hell, one of the architects of Trump's message, Steve Bannon, is former Goldman Sachs and he is great in my book. Trump has made plenty of other positive picks to offset any nuisance a couple former Goldman Sachs secretaries might bring.
Quote:Not to get all tin foil hat about the CIA. But.... it's the CIA. It's not like they've never engaged or acted with rogue intentions before both domestically and foreign. This is just an early attempt at false flagging Russia into the mainstream and public eye here to get the people's approval to punish Russia. And it's pretty pathetic. It's okay for us to go into virtually every other country on the planet and rile them all up but it's not cool, whether true or false, for another country to try that on us in defense?
I find it even more bothersome that people are upset about this yet don't even bat an eye at the fact that Saudi Arabia contributed 20% or roughly in the upwards of $100M during Hilary Clinton's campaign. It's even more troublesome when you consider that their country probably had more to do with the events of 9/11 more than Iraq or Afghanistan.
And meanwhile, the MSM just laughs off Pizzagate like it's a giant hoax. Yet you can see the odd terminology used in emails between Podesta revolving around "parties" for Obama and Clinton and it's beyond disturbing. Then you can look at all the freaky stuff the owner of Comet Pizza had all over his instagram that clearly indicated he's into some sick and twisted behavior.
Calling Byron LeftTown, calling Byron LeftTown! Your brother is in the lobby. Please answer immediately!
Quote:They are still bad, but they don't have the kind of influence on Trump that, say, Citigroup had on Obama. Hell, one of the architects of Trump's message, Steve Bannon, is former Goldman Sachs and he is great in my book. Trump has made plenty of other positive picks to offset any nuisance a couple former Goldman Sachs secretaries might bring.
C'mon - just be straight with everyone. You know as well as I do there is
nothing Trump could do at this point that you would find objectionable.
You are so invested as a Fan Boy that you'll twist and turn which ever way you have to.
You're just like the feminists who supported Hillary because she was a woman. You support Donnie because he took on your crush Stevie.
Quote:A dozen intel agencies provided zero evidence of Russian hacking. It's just one of those fun facts repeated endlessly in the hope that someone will believe it. Looks like they found at least one Huckleberry.
A dozen intelligence or more agencies (17 according to the NYT) are almost certain Russia did the hacking. How can they all agree Russia's government hacked the DNC if there is no evidence?
No agency has an obligation to publicize the evidence. Did you ever think that information might be confidential?
Quote:If he says Trump lost the election, then what else could he be implying? If this is 1000x worse than 2000 Florida, the only solution is a new vote from his point of view.
Harry Reid stated after the election Hillary lost the popular vote. That must be what he meant. Absolutely nothing he said could have implied he wants a new vote.
Quote:Looks like we will get Congressional hearings on the matter, so we will know more then.
Republicans who voted for Donald Trump control Congress. They also probably will approve the nominations of whoever Trump nominates for the SOS, CIA, and NSA offices. Why would they want hearings?
Quote:After all the elections the US has had their hand in influencing, we're finally mad at a country trying to influence ours?
The United States did not influence any foreign elections like this. What the Russian government did to promote Trump's election would be illegal here.
Quote:I'm not a Trump supporter, and I feel like the next 4 years us going to be a lot of rich people getting even richer but.....
I also don't see what's wrong with being friends with Russia, so long as they don't turn around and stab us in the back later.
I have a few Russian friends, good people.
The problem is Russia has already stabbed us in the back more times than we can count. Good citizens don't make good government in Russia, unfortunately.
Quote:This is wrong. The CIA didn't say anything.
A reporter from The Washington Post, a partisan Democrat publication, said that an ANONYMOUS SOURCE claimed that the CIA had evidence that a Russian or Russians hacked the US election. No federal official has come forth with the evidence.
This is right now in the realm of a bigfoot sighting.
Funny it's always Russia. I would have guessed that China, with lots of tech savvy citizens, would be the most likely country to hack into US politics. But Putin makes a much better boogeyman.
The NYT report says it all. Sources must be anonymous in professional reporting, as anybody who reads the news can easily figure out. Have you ever noticed anonymous sources talk to Ian Rapoport? Does an official source have no credibility just because his/her name is not published when in fact the reported event actually happened? They are anonymous in the media because telling secrets is an easy way to get a pink slip. If you worked for the CIA, you could get all of the proof you want that Russia hacked DNC emails for a specific purpose, then get fired for posting that information here.
Quote:The United States did not influence any foreign elections like this. What the Russian government did to promote Trump's election would be illegal here.
I hate to use the huffinton post as a source but the list of foreign elections we have meddled in is one of the more complete ones I could find. These are just the ones we know about. The US has a long history of influencing other countries elections in a far greater way than Russia allegedly has.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-...5d5ed382bd
That report came to the same conclusion: Russia, led directly by Vladimir Putin himself, hacked the DC specifically to hurt her campaign and promote Donald Trump's election Only the far right wingers who just like to hear what they want to, have any reason to doubt there is plenty of evidence nobody is allowed to release? Inability to get proof is only an a problem for people working for the CIA.
Quote:That report came to the same conclusion: Russia, led directly by Vladimir Putin himself, hacked the DC specifically to hurt her campaign and promote Donald Trump's election Only the far right wingers who just like to hear what they want to, have any reason to doubt there is plenty of evidence nobody is allowed to release? Inability to get proof is only an a problem for people working for the CIA.
Still need legitimate evidence and proof. That's a huge claim to make and to not have any body of water to support it outright is just being careless at this point. I am not the biggest fan of Trump and certainly not a fan of Clinton. But we were certainly headed for an actual War or at least another Cold War with Russia under Clinton's leadership.
Quote:Still need legitimate evidence and proof. That's a huge claim to make and to not have any body of water to support it outright is just being careless at this point. I am not the biggest fan of Trump and certainly not a fan of Clinton. But we were certainly headed for an actual War or at least another Cold War with Russia under Clinton's leadership.
Why isn't the reported evidence several agencies provided so far good enough?
Quote:Why isn't the reported evidence several agencies provided so far good enough?
Because it's coming from sources that are known to fabricate and manipulate the truth. The MSM is so full of [BAD WORD REMOVED] their logos should all be reflecting the color brown for now on. These type of allegations are reckless and it's typical MSM false flagging to sway the public opinion about invading another country. The Gulf of Tonkin lie for the public's blessing to war with Vietnam. The WMD lie for the public's blessing to war with Iraq. It's just another cheap shot to convince people we need to punish Russia. That's all this is about. To create another enemy with a false flag and made up narrative.
What the MSM and establishment is hoping to do now since the Democrats lost out is to prop up pressure on Trump to do something about Russia despite the fact that he's currently in good terms and standings with them. It amazes me that people can't see that [BAD WORD REMOVED] from a mile away. Ultimately, something will happen. It always does. Those in power get what they want. They do what they want. And 9 times out of 10. When it comes to "hacking". Especially high profile hacking cases. It's just a lone wolf. A kid with nothing better to do.
And right now, any outside foreign threat more than likely capable of hacking us include countries like Israel as the top threat. Along with India, North Korea and Cuba. And this is according to the NSA.....
It's no secret we want to knock Assad off in Syria. When Putin extended a hand to our country to fight ISIS we turned our cheek and told them no thanks. Now we're trying to turn Syria into a "no fly zone" to basically turn Assad into Gaddafi 2.0. It's the same bogus narrative being fed to our people here thanks to the MSM. And people eat it up like it's the truth. The UN and our Government are terrible. I love my country. But to willingly accept everything that they say and tell you is crazy. They don't work for us. They work for their own self interests to deepen their pockets further. It's all about the money. And War is the biggest profitable game that can be played when you have an economic collapse looming above your country. We need to blame someone. And Russia's been pegged for that role. Nothing more, nothing less.
Quote:Why isn't the reported evidence several agencies provided so far good enough?
Listen. It wasn't 17 agencies. That is an MSM talking point. It was James Clapper. A single person, the head of the Intelligence. The FBI, NSA, DHS, and the rest didn't all come out individually and say they believe its the Russians.
This is the same guy who lied to Congress about NSA surveillance.
In this same statement that all you gullible lefties get this talking point from, he said they didn't have the evidence to attribute their suspicion to the Russian government.
Quote:Calling Byron LeftTown, calling Byron LeftTown! Your brother is in the lobby. Please answer immediately!
Google: jeffrey dahmer tony podesta arch of hysteria