(07-09-2017 03:25 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:17 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  By the way, just as an aside, the intelligence community NEVER states anything as an absolute. If they say Russia interfered with the US election, it means they BELIEVE they did---it doesn't mean the can PROVE they did with 100% confidence. So when Trump leaves room for doubt, he is FAR more reflective of the any actual conclusion in the report than the press (which acts as if the US intelligence agencies have rock solid 100% proof---they don't).

Exactly, "we assess" is basically "we speculate" or "we make an educated guess that." I find it telling that the NSA which would likely have the best evidence if any exists, only had "moderate confidence." That's striking to me given that this report was prepared at Obama's behest. It's all much ado about nothing.

I suspect we have some evidence...software finger prints, information from cultivated sources, etc. That said, we never even examined the DNC servers....we know our software suite--which is capable of leaving the fingerprints of other nations behind---was stolen (and we dont even know who stole it). We can peice together a most likley culprit---but its nothing like the 100% certainty that the press likes to present. I'd also add that it is COMPLETELY plausible that the Russians had NOTHING to do with the hack of the DNC and that the released documents and emails were an inside job from a angry Sanders supporter. So, a reasonable explanation is that the Russians WANTED to disrupt our election---they tried to disrupt the election---but failed. Meanwhile, a leak from the inside the DNC occurred due to a disgruntled Bernie supporter. In other words---the two events could be completely unrelated.

Point being---we dont have anywhere near 100% certainty.

The report mentions Putin hiring internet trolls to spread propaganda. Ok, so we going to war over using an open communications venue to try to change peoples minds? I just don't see the big deal.

There is no way for any government entity to know what happened to the DNC because nobody has seen the servers. Could have been Putin, could have been a Russian acting on his own, could have been an overweight 15 year old American in moms basement in Idaho, could have been Seth Rich. I highly doubt Putin was involved though. If he was he would have held onto the info and used it to do whatever the phuck he wanted to when she was elected... you know... extortion.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Saying that this wasn't sophisticated and for all we know is some kid in his mom's basement is ridiculous. Russia has a cyber command just like we do... When Putin gives orders, which the CIA leaked, they don't just shop the work to some lonely bored kid in it for the lulz. They give it to their A team and say go get em you have unlimited resources. Why do republicans continue to be apologist about breaches of our national sovereignty? Russia needs to have sharp and disruptive sanctions piled on them, its about sending a message to not only them but China and the middle east that this will not be tolerated in the future.

(07-07-2017 10:08 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  Hope that Don didn't give up nuclear codes. Our president didn't confront the Russians on their meddling. America is weaker.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...ory-215353

Clinton gave China missle guidance technology, Russia Stealth technology and Uranium sales. Obama helped encourage Nuclear build up for Iran and billions of dollars to encourage it faster. So stop with make believe stuff.

(07-09-2017 03:52 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 03:25 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:17 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  By the way, just as an aside, the intelligence community NEVER states anything as an absolute. If they say Russia interfered with the US election, it means they BELIEVE they did---it doesn't mean the can PROVE they did with 100% confidence. So when Trump leaves room for doubt, he is FAR more reflective of the any actual conclusion in the report than the press (which acts as if the US intelligence agencies have rock solid 100% proof---they don't).

Exactly, "we assess" is basically "we speculate" or "we make an educated guess that." I find it telling that the NSA which would likely have the best evidence if any exists, only had "moderate confidence." That's striking to me given that this report was prepared at Obama's behest. It's all much ado about nothing.

I suspect we have some evidence...software finger prints, information from cultivated sources, etc. That said, we never even examined the DNC servers....we know our software suite--which is capable of leaving the fingerprints of other nations behind---was stolen (and we dont even know who stole it). We can peice together a most likley culprit---but its nothing like the 100% certainty that the press likes to present. I'd also add that it is COMPLETELY plausible that the Russians had NOTHING to do with the hack of the DNC and that the released documents and emails were an inside job from a angry Sanders supporter. So, a reasonable explanation is that the Russians WANTED to disrupt our election---they tried to disrupt the election---but failed. Meanwhile, a leak from the inside the DNC occurred due to a disgruntled Bernie supporter. In other words---the two events could be completely unrelated.

Point being---we dont have anywhere near 100% certainty.

The report mentions Putin hiring internet trolls to spread propaganda. Ok, so we going to war over using an open communications venue to try to change peoples minds? I just don't see the big deal.

There is no way for any government entity to know what happened to the DNC because nobody has seen the servers. Could have been Putin, could have been a Russian acting on his own, could have been an overweight 15 year old American in moms basement in Idaho, could have been Seth Rich. I highly doubt Putin was involved though. If he was he would have held onto the info and used it to do whatever the phuck he wanted to when she was elected... you know... extortion.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Saying that this wasn't sophisticated and for all we know is some kid in his mom's basement is ridiculous. Russia has a cyber command just like we do... When Putin gives orders, which the CIA leaked, they don't just shop the work to some lonely bored kid in it for the lulz. They give it to their A team and say go get em you have unlimited resources. Why do republicans continue to be apologist about breaches of our national sovereignty? Russia needs to have sharp and disruptive sanctions piled on them, its about sending a message to not only them but China and the middle east that this will not be tolerated in the future.

Breaches of our national sovereignty? I voted and I am confident the results were accurate.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(07-09-2017 04:08 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 10:08 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  Hope that Don didn't give up nuclear codes. Our president didn't confront the Russians on their meddling. America is weaker.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...ory-215353

Clinton gave China missle guidance technology, Russia Stealth technology and Uranium sales. Obama helped encourage Nuclear build up for Iran and billions of dollars to encourage it faster. So stop with make believe stuff.

Dems are idiots. Its tiring honestly

(07-09-2017 04:08 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 10:08 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  Hope that Don didn't give up nuclear codes. Our president didn't confront the Russians on their meddling. America is weaker.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...ory-215353

Clinton gave China missle guidance technology, Russia Stealth technology and Uranium sales. Obama helped encourage Nuclear build up for Iran and billions of dollars to encourage it faster. So stop with make believe stuff.

That is fake news.

(07-09-2017 03:52 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 03:25 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:17 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  By the way, just as an aside, the intelligence community NEVER states anything as an absolute. If they say Russia interfered with the US election, it means they BELIEVE they did---it doesn't mean the can PROVE they did with 100% confidence. So when Trump leaves room for doubt, he is FAR more reflective of the any actual conclusion in the report than the press (which acts as if the US intelligence agencies have rock solid 100% proof---they don't).

Exactly, "we assess" is basically "we speculate" or "we make an educated guess that." I find it telling that the NSA which would likely have the best evidence if any exists, only had "moderate confidence." That's striking to me given that this report was prepared at Obama's behest. It's all much ado about nothing.

I suspect we have some evidence...software finger prints, information from cultivated sources, etc. That said, we never even examined the DNC servers....we know our software suite--which is capable of leaving the fingerprints of other nations behind---was stolen (and we dont even know who stole it). We can peice together a most likley culprit---but its nothing like the 100% certainty that the press likes to present. I'd also add that it is COMPLETELY plausible that the Russians had NOTHING to do with the hack of the DNC and that the released documents and emails were an inside job from a angry Sanders supporter. So, a reasonable explanation is that the Russians WANTED to disrupt our election---they tried to disrupt the election---but failed. Meanwhile, a leak from the inside the DNC occurred due to a disgruntled Bernie supporter. In other words---the two events could be completely unrelated.

Point being---we dont have anywhere near 100% certainty.

The report mentions Putin hiring internet trolls to spread propaganda. Ok, so we going to war over using an open communications venue to try to change peoples minds? I just don't see the big deal.

There is no way for any government entity to know what happened to the DNC because nobody has seen the servers. Could have been Putin, could have been a Russian acting on his own, could have been an overweight 15 year old American in moms basement in Idaho, could have been Seth Rich. I highly doubt Putin was involved though. If he was he would have held onto the info and used it to do whatever the phuck he wanted to when she was elected... you know... extortion.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Saying that this wasn't sophisticated and for all we know is some kid in his mom's basement is ridiculous. Russia has a cyber command just like we do... When Putin gives orders, which the CIA leaked, they don't just shop the work to some lonely bored kid in it for the lulz. They give it to their A team and say go get em you have unlimited resources. Why do republicans continue to be apologist about breaches of our national sovereignty? Russia needs to have sharp and disruptive sanctions piled on them, its about sending a message to not only them but China and the middle east that this will not be tolerated in the future.

John Podesta fell for a phishing email he thought came from Microsoft. The email he fell for is available in the Wikileaks email DNC dump. The email seems to have originated from the Ukraine. No big cyber security force, and very well could have originated in someones basement. Oh and John Podesta's password? "Password." I kid you not.

Sorry meant Google. Here is the email chain.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/34899

(07-08-2017 05:52 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 05:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 05:25 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 04:57 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 04:22 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  Putin said Trump accepted his denial of election tampering. WH refuses to deny this claim. Our president just got cucked on the world stage.

Only a mental midget would think Trump got cucked by Putin.

Putin lied to Trumps face about Russian meddling and Trump accepted it. No recourse, just an agreement to assure we don't meddle their elections.
Putin got protection for his boy Assad in SW Syria.
And
What exactly did we get out of it? A promise that Russia won't interfere next time? Why follow that when "It wasn't me" is so easily accepted by president snowflake?

When did republicans become the soft on Russia party? Reagan must be rolling over in his grave.

We have already punished Putin. Sanctions are in place. Compounds were impounded and not returned. We carved out a no fly zone and an American sphere of influence in Syria. Syria will now never be a unified nation under Assad. We desroyed much of Syrias AF. We stopped the use of chemical weapons in that country. And, Trump got an agreement that will defuse a potential incident that could cause WWIII. Putin was confronted and he lied. Putin was confronted in Syria and he backed away from the US zone.

If Hillary had done the same thing you'd be as happy as a puppy with 2 peckers. You should be happy, Trump just cleaned up Obama's mess (he could stopped the Russian election meddling but didnt and he failed to confron Russia in Syria---which is why we are where we are there). Trump still has to clean up the N Korean Obama mess. Obama was fricken joke in foriegn affairs. Dude got played by everyone everyday and twice on Sundays.

Oh so Obama's sanctions and expulsions are adequate? Isn't it still party line to call his actions feckless? American sphere of influence in the new ceasefire zone? Bwahahaha. That is Russian controlled turf now. We went from being able to strike anywhere we needed, to giving a genocidal dictator a safe space... We didn't destroy their air force, hell we didn't even destroy their runways for more than a couple hrs. Russia is currently blocking sanctions on NK at the UN security council and increasing trade with them as China backs off... Yet Tbag does nothing. You cheerleaders are delusional when it comes to Trump in foreign affairs. He was played like a fiddle.

Even if he was - not that he was - that's infinitely better than blowing every world leader like a skin flute on the world stage.

(07-08-2017 06:23 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 05:25 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 04:57 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(07-08-2017 04:22 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  Putin said Trump accepted his denial of election tampering. WH refuses to deny this claim. Our president just got cucked on the world stage.

Only a mental midget would think Trump got cucked by Putin.

Putin lied to Trumps face about Russian meddling and Trump accepted it. No recourse, just an agreement to assure we don't meddle their elections.
Putin got protection for his boy Assad in SW Syria.
And
What exactly did we get out of it? A promise that Russia won't interfere next time? Why follow that when "It wasn't me" is so easily accepted by president snowflake?

When did republicans become the soft on Russia party? Reagan must be rolling over in his grave.

Link?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

He can't reveal his sources.

(07-08-2017 07:11 PM)shere khan Wrote:  And then I posted a tweet of me kicking cnn's asss. They were like bugs on a street light. Lol

Would you just look at all the grim faced world leaders expressing their dislike of our POTUS. Shocking I tell ya.

(07-09-2017 03:52 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 03:25 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:17 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  By the way, just as an aside, the intelligence community NEVER states anything as an absolute. If they say Russia interfered with the US election, it means they BELIEVE they did---it doesn't mean the can PROVE they did with 100% confidence. So when Trump leaves room for doubt, he is FAR more reflective of the any actual conclusion in the report than the press (which acts as if the US intelligence agencies have rock solid 100% proof---they don't).

Exactly, "we assess" is basically "we speculate" or "we make an educated guess that." I find it telling that the NSA which would likely have the best evidence if any exists, only had "moderate confidence." That's striking to me given that this report was prepared at Obama's behest. It's all much ado about nothing.

I suspect we have some evidence...software finger prints, information from cultivated sources, etc. That said, we never even examined the DNC servers....we know our software suite--which is capable of leaving the fingerprints of other nations behind---was stolen (and we dont even know who stole it). We can peice together a most likley culprit---but its nothing like the 100% certainty that the press likes to present. I'd also add that it is COMPLETELY plausible that the Russians had NOTHING to do with the hack of the DNC and that the released documents and emails were an inside job from a angry Sanders supporter. So, a reasonable explanation is that the Russians WANTED to disrupt our election---they tried to disrupt the election---but failed. Meanwhile, a leak from the inside the DNC occurred due to a disgruntled Bernie supporter. In other words---the two events could be completely unrelated.

Point being---we dont have anywhere near 100% certainty.

The report mentions Putin hiring internet trolls to spread propaganda. Ok, so we going to war over using an open communications venue to try to change peoples minds? I just don't see the big deal.

There is no way for any government entity to know what happened to the DNC because nobody has seen the servers. Could have been Putin, could have been a Russian acting on his own, could have been an overweight 15 year old American in moms basement in Idaho, could have been Seth Rich. I highly doubt Putin was involved though. If he was he would have held onto the info and used it to do whatever the phuck he wanted to when she was elected... you know... extortion.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Saying that this wasn't sophisticated and for all we know is some kid in his mom's basement is ridiculous. Russia has a cyber command just like we do... When Putin gives orders, which the CIA leaked, they don't just shop the work to some lonely bored kid in it for the lulz. They give it to their A team and say go get em you have unlimited resources. Why do republicans continue to be apologist about breaches of our national sovereignty? Russia needs to have sharp and disruptive sanctions piled on them, its about sending a message to not only them but China and the middle east that this will not be tolerated in the future.

The real danger to our national sovereignty is the influx of illegal aliens the democrats seem hell bent on encouraging and enabling.

(07-09-2017 03:52 PM)Godzilla Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 03:25 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 02:17 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 01:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  By the way, just as an aside, the intelligence community NEVER states anything as an absolute. If they say Russia interfered with the US election, it means they BELIEVE they did---it doesn't mean the can PROVE they did with 100% confidence. So when Trump leaves room for doubt, he is FAR more reflective of the any actual conclusion in the report than the press (which acts as if the US intelligence agencies have rock solid 100% proof---they don't).

Exactly, "we assess" is basically "we speculate" or "we make an educated guess that." I find it telling that the NSA which would likely have the best evidence if any exists, only had "moderate confidence." That's striking to me given that this report was prepared at Obama's behest. It's all much ado about nothing.

I suspect we have some evidence...software finger prints, information from cultivated sources, etc. That said, we never even examined the DNC servers....we know our software suite--which is capable of leaving the fingerprints of other nations behind---was stolen (and we dont even know who stole it). We can peice together a most likley culprit---but its nothing like the 100% certainty that the press likes to present. I'd also add that it is COMPLETELY plausible that the Russians had NOTHING to do with the hack of the DNC and that the released documents and emails were an inside job from a angry Sanders supporter. So, a reasonable explanation is that the Russians WANTED to disrupt our election---they tried to disrupt the election---but failed. Meanwhile, a leak from the inside the DNC occurred due to a disgruntled Bernie supporter. In other words---the two events could be completely unrelated.

Point being---we dont have anywhere near 100% certainty.

The report mentions Putin hiring internet trolls to spread propaganda. Ok, so we going to war over using an open communications venue to try to change peoples minds? I just don't see the big deal.

There is no way for any government entity to know what happened to the DNC because nobody has seen the servers. Could have been Putin, could have been a Russian acting on his own, could have been an overweight 15 year old American in moms basement in Idaho, could have been Seth Rich. I highly doubt Putin was involved though. If he was he would have held onto the info and used it to do whatever the phuck he wanted to when she was elected... you know... extortion.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Saying that this wasn't sophisticated and for all we know is some kid in his mom's basement is ridiculous. Russia has a cyber command just like we do... When Putin gives orders, which the CIA leaked, they don't just shop the work to some lonely bored kid in it for the lulz. They give it to their A team and say go get em you have unlimited resources. Why do republicans continue to be apologist about breaches of our national sovereignty? Russia needs to have sharp and disruptive sanctions piled on them, its about sending a message to not only them but China and the middle east that this will not be tolerated in the future.

Wait. What? If they have the same OP's we do, how can you leftist clowns ***** about that?

We ALL know this goes on, and has since time immemorial.

How on earth were we breached?

Where was the NSA, FBI, DSI, DOD, zerO Admin and all the other alphabet soup agencies up there to make sure this didn't/wasn't happening? Playing the gofff I'll assume, you were OUTRAGED!!! about that, too, right?

When did this "hacking" (read: phishing, 12 year old's stuff) occur? After the glorious Nov 8-9?!? My guess it was well before that, and funny...

Nobody gave a schit.

Howz that? Clowns being clowns

(07-09-2017 05:42 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  

(07-09-2017 04:08 PM)CardFan1 Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 10:08 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote:  Hope that Don didn't give up nuclear codes. Our president didn't confront the Russians on their meddling. America is weaker.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...ory-215353

Clinton gave China missle guidance technology, Russia Stealth technology and Uranium sales. Obama helped encourage Nuclear build up for Iran and billions of dollars to encourage it faster. So stop with make believe stuff.

That is fake news.

It is?

Can you refute these pretty well documented events?

This should be fascinating.

I call fabrics on the OP.