Joined: 13 May 2011 Age: 57 Gender: Male Posts: 13,144 Location: The end of the northwest passage
07 Jun 2017, 1:52 am
Ignoring this hack would also be a problem. Acting like Russia's all cool, when they clearly aren't.
_________________ "I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade
Joined: 12 Apr 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 49,751 Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
07 Jun 2017, 2:00 am
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Even if a 4 year old could hack Podesta's emails, that hardly means doing it was justifiable. That's like saying, a 4 year old could have broken into my apartment.
No one that I know of is saying it was justified based on its simplicity. What is being said, is the way the apartment was broken into was so simplistic (let's say a spare key was used) that anyone, even a 4 year old could have done it.
Still, it sounds as if the DNC is being blamed for getting hacked.
_________________ -Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Ignoring this hack would also be a problem. Acting like Russia's all cool, when they clearly aren't.
Cold War never ended or so it seems... But I don't think they are ignoring it.
Arresting Reality Winning and the applicable search warrant. Is standard procedure because she committed a crime (separate from the hacks) and violated her security clearance. She will get a trial and so should Snowden.
Kraichgauer wrote:
You guys on the right are at the very least excusing it. As for Reality Winner: again, you guys embraced Snowden and Assange as long as they helped you against Obama and Clinton. But as soon as your Orange Messiah, and his boss in the Kremlin get the same treatment, you're up in arms.
What am I excusing? Did a hack happen? Sure, good chance Russia or just some other interested party. Was Trump involved? Doesn't appear so, no evidence of collusion.
Joined: 24 Sep 2013 Gender: Male Posts: 27,828 Location: Twin Peaks
07 Jun 2017, 2:38 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Even if a 4 year old could hack Podesta's emails, that hardly means doing it was justifiable. That's like saying, a 4 year old could have broken into my apartment.
No one that I know of is saying it was justified based on its simplicity. What is being said, is the way the apartment was broken into was so simplistic (let's say a spare key was used) that anyone, even a 4 year old could have done it.
Still, it sounds as if the DNC is being blamed for getting hacked.
Well that wouldn't be saying the scam was excusable. It is though pointing out cause and effect. There was woeful negligence and ignorance when it came to security measures. They do therefore share part of the blame.
Joined: 10 Apr 2014 Age: 45 Gender: Male Posts: 3,603 Location: USA
07 Jun 2017, 3:16 am
EzraS wrote:
Aristophanes wrote:
EzraS wrote:
And the ironic thing in what you said is, what did take place, what is factually known, is that the methodology used resembled that of a 16 year old kid or a 24 year old intern, and not Russia's 300 more years in espionage.
I'm going to hold you to the same standards here as you're holding everyone else, link me the evidence please. Because I'm pretty sure a 16 year old kid and a 24 year old intern combined couldn't replicate the fancy-bear virus, even if they're savants.
What virus? A standard phishing scam email is not a virus. Podesta received an email made to look like it was coming from Google regarding his gmail account and asked for his password. So Podesta replied by supplying his password. That's it. No hacking. No virus.
Now emails contain what are called headers. A series of letters, numbers, dashes and dots. If you know how to read that stuff, it tells you among other things the address of the IP provider which looks like this 30.21.153.864. That's not the address of the person who sent it, just the address of the IP provider. IP addresses are very easy to fake. If you go to YouTube you can find an abundance of videos showing how simple it is to do that. Here's a video that takes 3 minutes to show how it's done and this is just the very basics. The tip of the iceberg.
The headers also provide information such as what browser was used, what type of device sent it and so on. All of which can be easily altered just like an IP address. Again there's lots of short YouTube videos on how to do this stuff. It is very basic. All you have to do is know what the numbers and letters represent the same way an automobile VIN number tells you a bunch of stuff about the vehicle if you know how to read it and alter them to say something else.
Many experts such as Julian Assange and John McAfee have said a 14 year old kid could have done it. If you want me to compile more about this I will. I've already went through it all when I looked into the matter months ago.
1. Julian Assange is not a computer expert, and John McAfee still has an active warrant out for murder in Belize, a country he fled four years ago. Do you have credible sources?
2. Phishing describes how one gains access to said account, that doesn't account for the transfer of multiple gigs of information from multiple internal server locations, that takes a program to do, hence the reason fancy-bear is relevant since it was found on those same servers.
3. You're talking to someone that programs RIA's (rich internet applications) in his spare time, I know exactly what information headers have, and how they can be exploited. The DNC servers used SSL encryption, which eliminates any kind of header spoofing (same encryption this site uses). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security
4. Still waiting for some links to back up your claims with outside sources.
edit-- for giggles: let findAMoron = () => { let label = document.createElement('div'); let input = document.createElement('input'); input.setAttribute('type', 'text'); label.innerHTML = 'if you believe there was no Russian interference in the election please enter your name'; input.addEventListener('input', function() { if (typeof input.value === 'string'){ console.log('Moron name: ' + input.value); if (darwinAwardDatabase.space !== 'full'){ darwinAwardDatabase.upload(input.value); }else{ console.log('god help us all'); } } }); }; findAMoron();
Joined: 24 Sep 2013 Gender: Male Posts: 27,828 Location: Twin Peaks
07 Jun 2017, 4:14 am
Aristophanes wrote:
1. Julian Assange is not a computer expert, and John McAfee still has an active warrant out for murder in Belize, a country he fled four years ago. Do you have credible sources?
2. Phishing describes how one gains access to said account, that doesn't account for the transfer of multiple gigs of information from multiple internal server locations, that takes a program to do, hence the reason fancy-bear is relevant since it was found on those same servers.
3. You're talking to someone that programs RIA's (rich internet applications) in his spare time, I know exactly what information headers have, and how they can be exploited. The DNC servers used SSL encryption, which eliminates any kind of header spoofing (same encryption this site uses). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Layer_Security
4. Still waiting for some links to back up your claims with outside sources.
1. Probably. But now I guess I'll have to do a background check on them to make sure there isn't something there that's irrelevant to their knowledge.
2. Unfortunately I got side tracked and was focusing on the Podesta incedent.
3. Since I thought that you were calling the Podesta email phish a virus, I thought you were one of those folks who don't know much about it.
4. My claims of what? That email headers can easily be faked? Because as far as I know that's all I claimed regarding the matter. That and I so far haven't seen anything presented that equates to a smoking gun.
Last edited by EzraS on 07 Jun 2017, 4:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
John McAfee is only a person of interest in connection to a murder, who happens to be his neighbor. Not long before that incident, the local police arrested him for unlicensed drug manufacturing and weapons, he was released with out charge. He was never convicted, only suspected... Now I didn't follow this to closely, but as I recall he didn't trust the police in Belize. Can't blame him really. They did seize his property and burn his home down. Currently Belize has not accused him of anything else and stopped seeking McAfee's imprisonment.
He currently resides in America and we have extradition treaties with Belize... So I don't think this accusation discredits McAfee's credibility as a computer expert.
Joined: 24 Sep 2013 Gender: Male Posts: 27,828 Location: Twin Peaks
07 Jun 2017, 4:51 am
SH90 wrote:
John McAfee is only a person of interest in connection to a murder, who happens to be his neighbor. Not long before that incident, the local police arrested him for unlicensed drug manufacturing and weapons, he was released with out charge. He was never convicted, only suspected... Now I didn't follow this to closely, but as I recall he didn't trust the police in Belize. Can't blame him really. They did seize his property and burn his home down. Currently Belize has not accused him of anything else and stopped seeking McAfee's imprisonment.
He currently resides in America and we have extradition treaties with Belize... So I don't think this accusation discredits McAfee's credibility as a computer expert.
No it doesn't of course. Now I heard others speak on the matter such as a retired CIA agent who specialized in forensics but of course I don't remember his or names of others. I had simply read enough and heard enough to convince me that the matter was inconclusive.
If there is something conclusive, I'd like to see it. Until then I'll go on considering the matter inconclusive.
I think it's funny that people are willing to sling crap on the wall, just to see if it sticks... They will do anything to see Trump impeached. Because they think (corrupt) Clinton will become president. While failing to recognize the chain of command. Impeach Trump, Mike Pence becomes president and then Paul Ryan. Clinton is no where on the chain of command.
Joined: 24 Sep 2013 Gender: Male Posts: 27,828 Location: Twin Peaks
07 Jun 2017, 7:35 am
SH90 wrote:
I think it's funny that people are willing to sling crap on the wall, just to see if it sticks... They will do anything to see Trump impeached. Because they think (corrupt) Clinton will become president. While failing to recognize the chain of command. Impeach Trump, Mike Pence becomes president and then Paul Ryan. Clinton is no where on the chain of command.
There does seem to be a heavy air of desperation which seems to cloud and or distort rational thinking. I have a hard time grasping being so dedicated to a political party and or canidate that it becomes so emotionally devastating when they lose. Or being so deeply opposed to a political party and or candidate it's so emotionally devastating when they win. It's hard to view people capable of rational thought under such circumstances. This desperate hope that somehow some way what's been done can somehow be undone and they can get what they so badly want. I suppose acceptance will set in to some degree eventually.
Pence would become President should Trump be impeached and convicted.
I am glad you are aware of the chain of command, many are not and simply believe Clinton will take command.
kraftiekortie wrote:
Always keep in mind that "impeached" only means "indicted." Clinton was impeached and acquitted.
I am aware an conviction would have to be made in order to forcibly remove someone from office. It doesn't change the fact, that is the ultimate goal that many are aiming for. But this is getting into a different topic, especially on Clinton's impeachment where senate was just merely voting with party (All 45 Democrats Voted Not Guilty on Both Charges). Yet Clinton was cited for contempt of court by FDJ Susan Wright. Also settled out of court with Jones for $850,000.
Joined: 25 Aug 2013 Age: 68 Gender: Male Posts: 39,637 Location: Long Island, New York
07 Jun 2017, 11:30 am
kraftiekortie wrote:
Pence would become President should Trump be impeached and convicted.
Always keep in mind that "impeached" only means "indicted." Clinton was impeached and acquitted.
It is amazing to me that so many people think impeaching Trump means he is removed from office. We really need to start teaching civics again. The House of Representatives brings articles of impeachment by majority vote. In the Senate the impeached official is tried for those articles of impeachment. A two thirds majority of those present is needed to convict the official.
Lets talk reality here. I hear all this talk about the Democrats winning both Houses of Congress and "Impeaching Trump". First of all in the next mid term election in the Senate 25 Democrates are up for election and only 8 Republcans are up for relection. In the House everybody is up for reelection. So if Trump continues to slide in popularity maybe the Democrates gain control of House but the Republicans still will likely gain seats in the Senate. Let's say Trump support completly collapses he strarts foaming at the mouth during speeches and shoots people on fifth avenue and the Dems gain control of both houses of congress. The House will almost certainly bring articles of impeachment but you are still going to need a bunch of Republicans to vote to convict him.
Removing him via the 25th amendment is even more convoluted. Reality is barring an major health crises or mental difficulties much much more then is already obvoius the next plausable chance of removing him is the 2020 election.
_________________ “Self Acceptance is a process not a performance” “You are autistic enough. And you always have been”
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013 DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.
Joined: 4 Feb 2014 Gender: Male Posts: 87,510 Location: Queens, NYC
07 Jun 2017, 11:48 am
We'll have to see how this investigation into Russian collusion in our election proceeds. It's possible that the results could be Watergate like; it's possible that all charges leveled at Trump will be debunked.
There are many Republicans who don't really care for Trump---but for different reasons than the Democrats. Some Republicans don't think Trump "goes far enough" as far as health care is concerned. At least some of these conservatives think that Trump is morally debased.
We shall see. It could end up either way, in my opinion.
In that context, prior to the January 6 meeting, I discussed with the FBI’s leadership team whether I should be prepared to assure President-Elect Trump that we were not investigating him personally. That was true; we did not have an open counter-intelligence case on him. We agreed I should do so if circumstances warranted. During our one-on-one meeting at Trump Tower, based on PresidentElect Trump’s reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, I offered that assurance.
Quote:
I explained that we had briefed the leadership of Congress on exactly which individuals we were investigating and that we had told those Congressional leaders that we were not personally investigating President Trump. I reminded him I had previously told him that. He repeatedly told me, “We need to get that fact out.”
As for the rest of the one on one conversations:
Quote:
The FBI leadership team agreed with me that it was important not to infect the investigative team with the President’s request, which we did not intend to abide. We also concluded that, given that it was a one-on-one conversation, there was nothing available to corroborate my account.
But even then, here on 5-8-2016. This contradicts his memos:
07 Jun 2017, 1:52 am
