Assange interview

[Napoléon]

I mean, technically they were: http://fortune.com/2016/11/04/voting-mac...o-cylance/

How in any way does this show Russians hacking voting machines?

[Tiberius]

I mean, technically they were: http://fortune.com/2016/11/04/voting-mac...o-cylance/

How in any way does this show Russians hacking voting machines?

When did I say it did? You said people think the voting machines were hacked; I'm stating that they technically could have been. I'm not saying the Russians did it; it's too early for that anyway, but the fact is the machines could have been hacked.

[vorlon13]

What was hacked was Hillary's itinerary after the convention, no one noticed the Russians canceled Hillary appearances in 33 states.

If only someone had noticed in time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[LostLocke]

I find the idea of what was hacked to be completely irrelevant to the fact that we were hacked.

[GUBU]

And where's the evidence Brian? What are the allegations? What was actually hacked?

The evidence will be in server logs which I'm sure the FBI / CIA have access to. As other people have said, the FBI / CIA don't have to publicly present the evidence; they are going to present it to Congress and to the President.

It really astounds me that people actually blame fucking Russia for Hillary being one of the most corrupt politicians going.

There will be some people who do that sure, but even if Russia isn't to blame for Hillary losing, the fact that Russia may have influenced the election at all is a bad thing. These are two separate issues. There should be an investigation and the results of that investigation should be listened to (as well as scrutinized) because it is a big deal if a foreign government has the ability to influence a US election, even in a small way.

Last time the CIA and FBI together assured us of anything, we spent a decade not finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The reality is that they don't know where the hackers are from. If there is credible evidence it was the Russians, they would at least say what it was. Maybe wikileaks can find out and leak that.

So because they were wrong in the past, they must also be wrong now? Terrible logic. The reality is, finding evidence for weapons of mass destruction in a foreign country is a lot harder than finding evidence of foreign hacking on domestic servers which you have physical access to. Server logs exist, and they are usually verbose.

The CIA and FBI haven't revealed any evidence because that's not their job. They present their findings to Congress and the President before anything is made public, and they are doing that this week.

Julian Assange, a cyber security expert himself (not like Hilary's cheerleaders from Correct the Record) said security was so lax even a child (specifically a fourteen year old) hack into Hilary's records. That's how bad Hilary is at cyber security. She and the DNC were practically begging to get hacked and it's only now that they lament about Russian hackers.

The Democrats don't want to talk about substance (well, substantive issues affecting voters) and would use all kinds of excuses to justify a heavy corrupt candidate like Hilary. I sounds as though they want Donald to win in 2020 as well!

Assange is not a cyber security expert. He was a hacker in the 80's and 90's, and in modern times I haven't seen any work from him that suggests he is knowledgable about hacking / cyber security today, especially at an expert level.

The problem with his statement is you can apply it to practically anyone in the past 5 years. So many people and companies have been hacked. I bet even the RNC have servers that are insecure, I bet they have been hacked in the past too. Computer security is difficult.

Trump was hacked twice in the last 18 months. And the CIA confirmed the RNC was also hacked during the election using the same methods as the DNC hack (i.e. the Russian state did it), but the results were withheld.

[abaris]

I find the idea of what was hacked to be completely irrelevant to the fact that we were hacked.

I assume you haven't been hacked. The DNC has.

I also find, as I said a few months ago, the outrage to be an artificial and hypocritical one. If it was indeed the Russians, it's business as usual. I don't think for a second that the US services don't do their best to hack relevant Russian accounts. Probably with equal success if they're worth their pay checks.

What I would like to see however, was someone nailing this on Trump. During his campaign he made that remark, more or less encouraging the Russians to hack into Hillary's accounts. That would be fun and probably grounds for impeachment.

[scoobysnack]

For me this is funny because hacking from all sides have been going on for many years. Notice the democrats, don't want to focus on the details of what was "hacked", they just want you to believe they were hacked. Newsflash, the US has been hacking Russia, Russia has been hacking the US, the US has been hacking China, China has been hacking the US, all countries are involved in cyber warfare. China is actually a bigger threat to intellectual property costing the US billions of dollars each year in lost revenue. The dems just have their panties in a bunch because they don't want to admit Clinton is a horrible person who had a private server outside the government, and not only that got caught deleting emails, and having employees smash phones and hard drives with hammers and wiping servers. What are they hiding from the US government when under investigation? Never mind that, blame the Russians! What a joke!

[Autumnlicious]

Releasing information to the media to influence our elections is definitely a first in US-Russian relations.

I see your delusional ass has made up a flowery story about it like some shitty rendition of a kids make-nice fairy tale.

[dyresand]

1. Julian informs us the password to John Pedesta's e-mails was literally the word "password". WTF?

2. Hilary pays Brian Pagliano to pretty much re-wire the State Department so she can siphon top secret and Special Access Program intelligence so a home-brew basement server which was not encrypted for several months - really easy prey for hackers.

3. Hackers promptly  influence the election by showing the electorate Hilary's own words, thus informing them about a candidate. Should we have been kept in the dark about Hilary's misgivings? I think not.

4. Did Russia make Hillary call black youth "super-predators"? Did Russia make Hilary take all of that money from Wall Street? Did Russia make Hilary use BlackBerry devices the NSA said she could not use?

5. Hilary and the Democrats are awful at cyber security but: ZOMG! Russia! Russia! Russia!

6. Surely the Russians would have rigged the election for a principled person like Bernie Sanders or Rand Paul. The pro-Hilary media propped up Donald Trump because they thought it would make the presidential election easier for her to win. But she couldn't even beat the biggest buffoon out of all Republican candidates. So blame Russia and Putin instead of Hilary!

Now she is trying to Run for governor of New York she will lose because the current governor is siding with Bernie Sanders to get people a free college education 
no one is going to fucking vote for her people love free stuff that they pay for in taxes like a college education.

[vorlon13]

If someone's password is "password" and they give it out in response to some clickbait, is it really 'hacking' ?

Don't the real hackers have some standards, any standards ?

Hell, by this criteria, I, who have no discernable computer skills beyond posting pics and deleting the occasional spammer here, am qualified to consider myself a world class hacker.


At some point action against the Puties is appropriate, but there is dire need for emergency brain augmentation/round the clock guardianship/commitment in a facility for the feebleminded for John Podesta.

Dear God in heaven, get someone by his side IMMEDIATELY to remind him to breath periodically, and to refresh his recollection of how and when to use toilet paper.