The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

One is a sociopath, sexually assaults women, has a track record of sketchy business dealings, lying about his interests, walks in on girls while dressing for his parents, grabs them by their genitals, kisses them without asking "because he's a star"

.......and Hilary swallowed her pride and saved her marriage, which is the "for better or worse" part of the vows. Yeah, she's awful.

(11-04-2016 08:10 PM)Moomba Wrote:  One is a sociopath, sexually assaults women, has a track record of sketchy business dealings, lying about his interests, walks in on girls while dressing for his parents, grabs them by their genitals, kisses them without asking "because he's a star"

.......and Hilary swallowed her pride and saved her marriage, which is the "for better or worse" part of the vows. Yeah, she's awful.

Then you must not really know too much about Whitehouse Counsel Bernard Nussbaum's removal of Whitewater documents from Vince Foster's office within hours of Foster's death. The nonsucide type content of Foster's unsigned suicide note. The subpoenaed Madison Guaranty documents that the Clintons said they lost that magically reappeared 2 years later in the Whitehouse private residence of the Clintons.
HRC private server is just the most recent manifestation of her continued
pattern of lies and deceit. I don't buy into HRC's honoring her martial vows being the main reason for staying with WJC. She's far too calculating an individual.

Quote: Tons of people can manipulate and cajole, doesn't make them geniuses.

That's Trump's game.

He's playing checkers. In this election, he knows nothing else.

HRC has been playing chess since the early 90's.

I asked this board what her greatest achievement has been.

The answer is EASY.

For two and a half decades she and WJC have built perhaps the most massive and powerful political machine this country has ever seen. By using government sanctioned power and pedaling influence (another way to say that is through extortion and cronyism) she has positioned herself to become the next president of the United State. This, despite the fact that she has no political philosophical core, and despite the fact that few see her as a good leader, as likable, or as trustworthy. And.....she'll likely be elected president while under criminal investigation by the FBI.

Coincidently, she and her husband have become immensely rich along the way

These accomplishments aren't unique to the Clintons. But the two of them have taken "the game" to another level.

To argue that HRC and her peeps are politically unsophisticated just doesn't fly.

Quote:As far as producing an "email" to say it's been doctored? I would be as skeptical of that as the original. It takes NOTHING to make a fake email that looks legit to the average user, which is probably how this whole "Wikileaks" deal started, with an "update your password" email/phish.

You make it sound as if email can/could never be used as evidence in a court of law because authenticity can never be proven.

In today's world, it's really impossible to produce and prove an original email?

Quote:This is the question to which you're complaining about not getting a direct answer?

There has been evidence, yes, to Russian hacking, not necessarily Wikileaks material. Why does it have to be related? Are they joined somehow?

Yeah that's the question.

No....they don't have to be related.

DE (Ernie) linked them in his post (using the narrative being pushed by the democrats and much of the MSM). So I responded.

(11-04-2016 10:38 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  People will realize when it is too late that Trump is a communist.

I just want to be on record so I can say I told you so.

Do you mean he prefers that "a few" should tell the masses how they must live, and that he prefers government run businesses over the private ones :) ?

(11-05-2016 04:50 AM)ESSSS Wrote:  

(11-04-2016 10:38 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  People will realize when it is too late that Trump is a communist.

I just want to be on record so I can say I told you so.

Do you mean he prefers that "a few" should tell the masses how they must live, and that he prefers government run businesses over the private ones :) ?

Government control/ownership of resources/private property and equal distribution of resources to everyone.

Quote:To argue that HRC and her peeps are politically unsophisticated just doesn't fly.

When I said unsophisticated, and you were too, it was in regards to understanding the in's and out's about tracking and discussing emails and their technical architecture. Assange and opponents are praying on people's lack of sophistication around this space.

When I say being manipulative and cajoling themselves into lofty positions, you and other's might call that sophisticated, there are many of us who just call them "azzholes". Might be the same thing. Depends if you respect their results and methods.

I don't. Not hers, not Bill's, and definitely not DTs. I think her greatest accomplishment is that she's a very successful career politician who has succeeded in that space. Doesn't mean I think that's "sophisticated" one bit.

Much like hair boy, he was born on third base, used his "ways" to achieve superficially successful things, and I'd tell him to his face to go pound sand if he ever took the posture he takes with others, towards me in business.

Don't even get me started if he started his act towards one of the women in my life that I love.

Quote:When I said unsophisticated, and you were too, it was in regards to understanding the in's and out's about tracking and discussing emails and their technical architecture.

That's not what I meant.

I meant that she and her organization have proven themselves to be very, very good at doing whatever is necessary to obtain a keep power over 25 years.

Mostly behind the scenes.

I will take your word for it regarding their IT capabilities.

But....it seems to me that if THEY believed the narrative that you endorse (the Wikileaks stuff is doctored and bogus) they would find/obtain/hire/coerce IT sophistication to work on their behalf to prove that narrative.

If you're telling me it's not possible to produce original emails, then I believe you. I know less than nothing about IT. But that just doesn't make sense to me.

Quote:I think her greatest accomplishment is that she's a very successful career politician who has succeeded in that space. Doesn't mean I think that's "sophisticated" one bit.

This is also what I tried to say.

To me, her "success" isn't what is impressive to me.

It's the fact that she has been so successful while being such an unlikeable, unimpressive (with respect to tangible achievements in her public life) and scandal-ridden person.

That impresses the hell out of me.

(11-05-2016 11:16 AM)ESSSS Wrote:  

Quote:When I said unsophisticated, and you were too, it was in regards to understanding the in's and out's about tracking and discussing emails and their technical architecture.

That's not what I meant.

I meant that she and her organization have proven themselves to be very, very good at doing whatever is necessary to obtain a keep power over 25 years.

Mostly behind the scenes.

I will take your word for it regarding their IT capabilities.

But....it seems to me that if THEY believed the narrative that you endorse (the Wikileaks stuff is doctored and bogus) they would find/obtain/hire/coerce IT sophistication to work on their behalf to prove that narrative.

If you're telling me it's not possible to produce original emails, then I believe you. I know less than nothing about IT. But that just doesn't make sense to me.

Quote:I think her greatest accomplishment is that she's a very successful career politician who has succeeded in that space. Doesn't mean I think that's "sophisticated" one bit.

This is also what I tried to say.

To me, her "success" isn't what is impressive to me.

It's the fact that she has been so successful while being such an unlikeable, unimpressive (with respect to tangible achievements in her public life) and scandal-ridden person.

That impresses the hell out of me.

As far as the emails...

Quote:But....it seems to me that if THEY believed the narrative that you endorse (the Wikileaks stuff is doctored and bogus) they would find/obtain/hire/coerce IT sophistication to work on their behalf to prove that narrative.

What I tried to say earlier was that they could possibly discount the authenticity to the point of it being a talking point. I'd have gone for that guy's throat, placed the burden of proof on him. He's "trying to do that now" with the DKMS but if he keeps talking, he'll expose himself and he knows that.

I think she and her camp opted to just let them snit away about the emails. Must have figured that arguing about it, trying to dismiss it with "technical experts" would only make it worse. This is where she would crush me if I came up against her or her ilk.

It's all politics. :-)

You being impressed is where we differ. I guess being so "unsophisticated" as types like she, CIO's, CEO's, and their ilk, I've been frustrated with their UNMITIGATED bull**** so many times that I can't stand those types. I hear her talk and my bs radar goes on.

I hear hair boy talk and I want to fight him.

See "Mitt Romney". He started talking last election? One of my former partners texted me immediately about him saying he reminded us of a big time REIT CEO that we did business with, and immediately had to fumigate ourselves after we were done.

"He reminds me of W_sson". Slimy. (that was for his benefit, haha)

You have to see similar. I did a gig at a major cancer ward hospital in California a few years back, led an implementation team. Those people had the politics DIALED.

Quote:You make it sound as if email can/could never be used as evidence in a court of law because authenticity can never be proven.

In today's world, it's really impossible to produce and prove an original email?

If they had the architecture setup to the point where there was great change control, access to servers, key rings and the email server was managed and audited to the point where you could rely on it, you could get close.

Ask me how many of those shops I've seen?

See "ENRON" and Sarbanes Oxley, where it just restates the obvious.

Quote:If they had the architecture setup to the point where there was great change control, access to servers, key rings and the email server was managed and audited to the point where you could rely on it, you could get close.

Ask me how many of those shops I've seen?

Huh...





If only email had been around in Paulie's day :)

I thought of that too!

When I worked for a government over fifteen years ago, they told us to not put anything in an email that you don't want on the front page of a newspaper. THAT is why I say they're not to sophisticated. This is nothing new.

I'd just attack Assange, his methods, his motivation and be done. I'm sure that's what Assange and Trump's camp were counting on and had a counter ready. She didn't. In that way, she's sophisticated.