Wikileaks releases Podesta's emails

[HamburgerBoy]

Zinfamous runs and hides ?

Heh, never.

He just made this exact post a few days ago. When I pointed out the obvious holes in it, he managed a single additional counter-response, then ducked.

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...ng-americans-to-vote-for-trump.2489620/page-2

He does this pretty frequently. Enter a thread, write one big post that looks reasoned and convincing on the surface of it with the occasional well-timed emotional plea, not unlike what narrative-crafters like John Oliver regularly concoct, but then fails to defend any of it when under scrutiny. Wait a couple days, then repost the exact same bullshit argument.

 

[agent00f]

He just made this exact post a few days ago. When I pointed out the obvious holes in it, he managed a single additional counter-response, then ducked.

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...ng-americans-to-vote-for-trump.2489620/page-2

He does this pretty frequently. Enter a thread, write one big post that looks reasoned and convincing on the surface of it with the occasional well-timed emotional plea, not unlike what narrative-crafters like John Oliver regularly concoct, but then fails to defend any of it when under scrutiny. Wait a couple days, then repost the exact same bullshit argument.

I guess this is all you were looking for:
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/793268442329735168

Even though investigation point to russia as source of their docs, and numerous democrat's docs leaked but I guess coincidentally no republicans.

"Believe me folks", ok.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

What makes it coincidence? What evidence do you have that the RNC was successfully hacked? Do you consider Trump an equivalent target for hacking by a foreign government relative to close associates of a former Secretary of State? If Republicans were hacked, wouldn't they want to use that as a counter-argument to the claim that Russia is selectively helping the Dems? Then, after answering all of those questions, ask yourself: if Russia hacked the RNC/Trump, what motive would they have to release it to Wikileaks, if they (Russia) want Trump to win?

 

[DrDoug]

/As usual, lots of irrelevant questions meant to distract...

I bet you drove your parents nuts as a kid. Probably still do.

 

[agent00f]

What makes it coincidence? What evidence do you have that the RNC was successfully hacked? Do you consider Trump an equivalent target for hacking by a foreign government relative to close associates of a former Secretary of State? If Republicans were hacked, wouldn't they want to use that as a counter-argument to the claim that Russia is selectively helping the Dems? Then, after answering all of those questions, ask yourself: if Russia hacked the RNC/Trump, what motive would they have to release it to Wikileaks, if they (Russia) want Trump to win?

Does trump org & associates or the similarly sizable RNC membership not present a similar surface for hacks?

Seems to me that
1. an entity would be particularly motivated to hack people they consider a greater threat
2. they would be additionally motivated to reveal info about said people even if it posed some risk to themselves

As to if russia would necessarily give rnc info to wikileaks, the post you linked to said: "If Russia hacked and retrieved data from RNC, then it's certainly possible that they are simply holding onto that info". Notice that "wikileaks" in the post you replied to was quoted, implying that it really means "the russians".

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Does trump org & associates or the similarly sizable RNC membership not present a similar surface for hacks?

Is size everything? Just because one large group is hacked, others MUST have been hacked? Sony had their emails hacked and leaked by Wikileaks. I guess that means Wikileaks is working with Apple and Samsung, huh?

Seems to me that
1. an entity would be particularly motivated to hack people they consider a greater threat
2. they would be additionally motivated to reveal info about said people even if it posed some risk to themselves

Are you now making an argument that Republicans weren't hacked, because they pose less of a threat to Russia? You can't simultaneously argue that the RNC was hacked and that Wikileaks won't leak anything, AND that the RNC wasn't hacked because Russia didn't want to.

As to if russia would necessarily give rnc info to wikileaks, the post you linked to said: "If Russia hacked and retrieved data from RNC, then it's certainly possible that they are simply holding onto that info". Notice that "wikileaks" in the post you replied to was quoted, implying that it really means "the russians".

Uh, that's my entire point, if I'm understanding you right. Smug fellas like zinfamous drop their "Hehe, Wikileaks sure is a Russian plant isn't it?" memes on a regular basis and then skedaddle. I'm arguing that if Russia really did hack the RNC and if they really do believe Clinton is a threat to Russia's interests, they would have no reason to leak material to Wikileaks.

 

[agent00f]

Is size everything? Just because one large group is hacked, others MUST have been hacked? Sony had their emails hacked and leaked by Wikileaks. I guess that means Wikileaks is working with Apple and Samsung, huh?

I was speaking to your contention that Trump/GOP has less surface area. Since you've given that up, I'll point out for this new claim that it's unlikely republicans have better security than democrats, and both are likely worse off than a tech corp not facing the force of the kremlin.

Are you now making an argument that Republicans weren't hacked, because they pose less of a threat to Russia? You can't simultaneously argue that the RNC was hacked and that Wikileaks won't leak anything, AND that the RNC wasn't hacked because Russia didn't want to.

Good thing nobody is insisting on the latter. Read what you're replying to more carefully.

It's however the case that assange & putin share a mutual enemy in clinton.

Uh, that's my entire point, if I'm understanding you right. Smug fellas like zinfamous drop their "Hehe, Wikileaks sure is a Russian plant isn't it?" memes on a regular basis and then skedaddle. I'm arguing that if Russia really did hack the RNC and if they really do believe Clinton is a threat to Russia's interests, they would have no reason to leak material to Wikileaks.

That quote is from zinfamous's post that you linked, evidently he doesn't believe what you think he does. What was insinuated is that wikileaks has become a tool for the russians, and russia might have good reason to only leak against parties most detrimental to them.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I was speaking to your contention that Trump/GOP has less surface area. Since you've given that up, I'll point out for this new claim that it's unlikely republicans have better security than democrats, and both are likely worse off than a tech corp not facing the force of the kremlin.

Trump does have less surface area. He's one guy with a shitty private company that's shady and secretive even by shitty private company standards. The DNC, on the other hand, is the current controlling party for the executive branch of the most powerful nation on Earth. What makes you say it's unlikely that Republicans have better security? Is there evidence that they've been hacked?

It's however the case that assange & putin share a mutual enemy in clinton.

Totally agreed there.

That quote is from zinfamous's post that you linked, evidently he doesn't believe what you think he does. What was insinuated is that wikileaks has become a tool for the russians, and russia might have good reason to only leak against parties most detrimental to them.

That is not what he said:

IMO, this is more of an assange thing than it is wikileaks. Assange astranged himself years ago from his core board and well before his "Exile," they were trying to get him out. The personality of Wikileaks is completely tied to Assange's ego and while he maintains control, it is only ever going to reflect his very clear agenda.

I recall reading some time ago that he really has no friends over there as the rest of the wikileaks power base actually wants to maintain the air of transparent neutrality. It is almost completely certain that they have the very same sort of leaked documents from the RNC and certainly a long history of Trump's own correspondence within his empire, but it isn't being released.

How rational is it to accept that only the DNC and only the Clintons are capable of having their information hacked? haha.

 

[MongGrel]

He just made this exact post a few days ago. When I pointed out the obvious holes in it, he managed a single additional counter-response, then ducked.

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...ng-americans-to-vote-for-trump.2489620/page-2

He does this pretty frequently. Enter a thread, write one big post that looks reasoned and convincing on the surface of it with the occasional well-timed emotional plea, not unlike what narrative-crafters like John Oliver regularly concoct, but then fails to defend any of it when under scrutiny. Wait a couple days, then repost the exact same bullshit argument.

I'm betting he just not taking the trouble to bother responding to you again over half the time.

Some posts are not worth responding to IMHO.

 

[DrDoug]

I'm betting he just not taking the trouble to bother responding to you again over half the time.

Some posts are not worth responding to IMHO.

Especially that dumb asses posts... talk about a deliberate distraction and waste of time.

 

[agent00f]

Trump does have less surface area. He's one guy with a shitty private company that's shady and secretive even by shitty private company standards. The DNC, on the other hand, is the current controlling party for the executive branch of the most powerful nation on Earth. What makes you say it's unlikely that Republicans have better security? Is there evidence that they've been hacked?

Again, there's no reason to believe that all the characters trump deal with, shady or not, are better against hackers. Esp given some of them seem to be under russia's influence, where the kremlin is not known to be refused. For example, his chief of staff used to work for Yanukovych; do you think putin has to ask twice for anything related to this? And all reporting on the matter claim the DNC has more nerds on staff than their RNC counterparts.

Seems rather preposterous to believe an entity with the resources of the kremlin can get all these goodies on the democrats and nothing on the republicans or trump.

That is not what he said:

What I quote came after that, but I'm sure you're already aware of this. It's better to just fess up to a mistake here than keep digging.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Again, there's no reason to believe that all the characters trump deal with, shady or not, are better against hackers. Esp given some of them seem to be under russia's umbrella of influence, where the kremlin is not known to ask politely. For example, his chief of staff used to work for Yanukovych; do you think putin has to ask twice for anything related to this? And all reporting on the matter claim the DNC has more nerds on staff than their RNC counterparts.

Seems rather preposterous to believe an entity with the resources of the kremlin can get all these goodies on the democrats and nothing on the republicans or trump.

What I quote came after that, but I'm sure you're already aware of this. It's better to just fess up to a mistake here than keep digging.

Manafort joined Trump's campaign well after the DNC hacks began. I don't understand what other characters you're referring to.

Right now it seems like Podesta was hacked because he responded to a phishing email. Not to mention the DNC hacks where you have people using the same email servers, broadcasting "Hey, we were hacked, but no worries, here is a new password for everyone (including the hackers) to view!" All the nerds and techies in the world won't save you if you're a total incompetent. The burden of proof is on a person making a claim.

Who said the Kremlin can't get the goodies? Maybe they just don't want to give them to Wikileaks.

You didn't quote zinfamous, and I was talking about a very specific post (the one I just quoted) when addressing him. If you thought I was referring to a different zinfamous post, that is your mistake.

 

[MongGrel]

Manafort joined Trump's campaign well after the DNC hacks began. I don't understand what other characters you're referring to.

Right now it seems like Podesta was hacked because he responded to a phishing email. Not to mention the DNC hacks where you have people using the same email servers, broadcasting "Hey, we were hacked, but no worries, here is a new password for everyone (including the hackers) to view!" All the nerds and techies in the world won't save you if you're a total incompetent. The burden of proof is on a person making a claim.

Who said the Kremlin can't get the goodies? Maybe they just don't want to give them to Wikileaks.

You didn't quote zinfamous, and I was talking about a very specific post (the one I just quoted) when addressing him. If you thought I was referring to a different zinfamous post, that is your mistake.

Manafort was involved with Trump and Russia long before he joined his campaign.

You seem to be missing the point.

Or trying to spin it.

 

[agent00f]

Manafort joined Trump's campaign well after the DNC hacks began. I don't understand what other characters you're referring to.

The point is the kremlin probably already knows quite a bit about Trump's chief of staff when he was literally working for them. So why no attempt to leverage this when they're releasing every Clinton kitchen recipe?

Right now it seems like Podesta was hacked because he responded to a phishing email. Not to mention the DNC hacks where you have people using the same email servers, broadcasting "Hey, we were hacked, but no worries, here is a new password for everyone (including the hackers) to view!" All the nerds and techies in the world won't save you if you're a total incompetent. The burden of proof is on a person making a claim.

I'm claiming that there's no reason to believe democrats are less competent than republicans here. If anything, literally every article on the matter of their digital operations claim the democrats have better, ie younger tech literate staff. It's instead rather your contention that republicans are relatively hack proof which is odd.

Who said the Kremlin can't get the goodies? Maybe they just don't want to give them to Wikileaks.

That's certain what I (and zinfamous) said.

You didn't quote zinfamous, and I was talking about a very specific post (the one I just quoted) when addressing him. If you thought I was referring to a different zinfamous post, that is your mistake.

Yes I did: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...o-vote-for-trump.2489620/page-2#post-38534698
" If Russia hacked and retrieved data from RNC, then it's certainly possible that they are simply holding onto that info "

Notice that's what you linked to from your own post: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...podestas-emails.2488543/page-24#post-38549571

Also notice again that came after what you tried to quote later.

 

[DrDoug]

Manafort was involved with Trump and Russia long before he joined his campaign.

You seem to be missing the point.

Or trying to spin it.

My vote is spin. Regarding why Russia may be getting in to hacking and boosting Trump over Clinton:

Russian is doing hacks and psyops because it can’t sustain great power military. Economy smaller than Korea, smaller than Italy, etc.

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) November 1, 2016

Russia's economy is a disaster right now, their military is broke as is the government. Just going off of Trump's previous statements on Russia, I'm sure he would be a lot friendlier to Russian relations as President than Hillary would (continuing where Obama left off). There was a blurb about the Russian military bringing out one of their smoky ships recently, complete with a tow rig for when it breaks down. Here it is.

The sanctions are hurting Russia's economy and they want them ended.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Manafort was involved with Trump and Russia long before he joined his campaign.

You seem to be missing the point.

Or trying to spin it.

Didn't know that Manafort and Trump were involved prior to hiring him as campaign manager. Any specifics buddy?

The point is the kremlin probably already knows quite a bit about Trump's chief of staff when he was literally working for them. So why no attempt to leverage this when they're releasing every Clinton kitchen recipe?

Because Russia might prefer Trump to win? Hint: I think Trump is a dumb person and that Clinton represents more of a threat to Putin. I'll admit that I was initially skeptical that the hacks originated from Russia when the leaks first broke, but in light of everything that has come out, I can accept it is most likely true and that Putin has reason to influence our election.

I'm claiming that there's no reason to believe democrats are less competent than republicans here. If anything, literally every article on the matter of their digital operations claim the democrats have better, ie younger tech literate staff. It's instead rather your contention that republicans are relatively hack proof which is odd.

I will happily accept that Republicans are just as hackable when evidence comes out indicating they are. Do you not give the Podesta/phishing thing any credence? Some of those young IT people actually told Podesta to reply to the phishing email thinking it was legit.

That's certain what I (and zinfamous) said.

No, it isn't, I'll try again.

IMO, this is more of an assange thing than it is wikileaks. Assange astranged himself years ago from his core board and well before his "Exile," they were trying to get him out. The personality of Wikileaks is completely tied to Assange's ego and while he maintains control, it is only ever going to reflect his very clear agenda.

I recall reading some time ago that he really has no friends over there as the rest of the wikileaks power base actually wants to maintain the air of transparent neutrality. It is almost completely certain that they [Wikileaks/Assange] have the very same sort of leaked documents from the RNC and certainly a long history of Trump's own correspondence within his empire, but it isn't being released.

How rational is it to accept that only the DNC and only the Clintons are capable of having their information hacked? haha.

And then for the second time in this thread after I challenged him earlier...

correct. If transparency were your concern, then you'd be asking why "wikileaks" hasn't released anything hacked from the RNC or the D Trump for president campaign.

If you have convinced yourself that no such hacks occurred, then you are being foolish.

I don't care about anything he said after in this context. If a person wants to half-back away from an indefensible point, that's perfectly fine, but anyone with a speck of intellectual honesty shouldn't then a few days later regurgitate the exact same indefensible point.

 

[MongGrel]

My vote is spin. Regarding why Russia may be getting in to hacking and boosting Trump over Clinton:



Russia's economy is a disaster right now, their military is broke as is the government. Just going off of Trump's previous statements on Russia, I'm sure he would be a lot friendlier to Russian relations as President than Hillary would (continuing where Obama left off). There was a blurb about the Russian military bringing out one of their smoky ships recently, complete with a tow rig for when it breaks down. Here it is.

The sanctions are hurting Russia's economy and they want them ended.

Yeah, they did float out the one aircraft they have to Syria range, Nato pushed not to allow it to refuel in Spain, and it did in North Africa.

I'm not sure if it is operating around Allepo ATM, it's been steaming that way for a week or so.

 

[MongGrel]

Didn't know that Manafort and Trump were involved prior to hiring him as campaign manager. Any specifics buddy?

There have been tons, even in threads on Andandtech. You can look easily find them on your own, but your usually to lazy to actually research anything yourself.

You do not seem to bother reading links people post most of the time, I'm not going to spoon feed you.

 

[DrDoug]

Yeah, they did float out the one aircraft they have to Syria range, Nato pushed not to allow it to refuel in Spain, and it did in North Africa.

I'm not sure if it is operating around Allepo ATM, it's been steaming that way for a week or so.

I think you mean "smoking that way for a week or so."...lol!

 

[HamburgerBoy]

There have been tons, even in threads on Andandtech. You can look easily find them on your own, but your usually to lazy to actually research anything yourself.

You do not seem to bother reading links people post most of the time, I'm not going to spoon feed you.

Are you referring to this?

Manafort and Stone pioneered a new style of firm, what K Street would come to call a double-breasted operation. One wing of the shop managed campaigns, electing a generation of Republicans, from Phil Gramm to Arlen Spector. The other wing lobbied the officials they helped to victory on behalf of its corporate clients. Over the course of their early years, they amassed a raft of blue-chip benefactors, including Salomon Brothers and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp.

Another early client was Donald J. Trump. What Trump wanted was help fending off potential rivals to his Atlantic City casino business. He especially feared the rise of Indian gaming. As the 2016 campaign has graphically illustrated, Trump doesn’t treat rivals gently. Testifying before a congressional committee in 1993, he began with his rote protestations of friendship. “Nobody likes Indians as much as Donald Trump.” He then proceeded to worry that the tribes would prove unable to fend off gangsters. “There is no way Indians are going to protect themselves from the mob ... It will be the biggest scandal ever, the biggest since Al Capone … An Indian chief is going to tell Joey Killer to please get off his reservation? It’s unbelievable to me.”

Trump poured money into a shell group called the New York Institute for Law and Society. The group existed solely to publish ads smearing his potential Indian competition. Under dark photos of needles and other junkie paraphernalia, the group asserted, “The St. Regis Mohawk Indian record of criminal activity is well documented.” (It wasn’t.) “Are these the new neighbors we want?” We know that Trump and Stone were behind the New York Institute because Gov. George Pataki investigated its doings. He slapped Trump and Stone with a $250,000 fine and required them to publicly apologize for running the ads.

Manafort didn’t own the Trump account at the firm. But one of his former partners told me that he would dispense advice and pitch in, winning Trump’s trust. When Manafort took an apartment in Trump Towers in 2006, he would kibitz with his old client when they’d run into one another on the elevator. “Trump knew this guy was top drawer,” says one Republican operative.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...e_s_made_a_career_of_reinventing_tyrants.html

Most of that is the Stone guy, and well before Manafort got involved with Ukraine-Russian relations. Does every person that ever rented an apartment in Trump Towers count as a person "involved" with Trump?

 

[MongGrel]

Are you referring to this ?

Enough of that.

It's a short list of 3, other than the Chinese spammers, but really ?

 

[agent00f]

I will happily accept that Republicans are just as hackable when evidence comes out indicating they are.

Seems you already accept that russia isn't going to provide it.

Do you not give the Podesta/phishing thing any credence? Some of those young IT people actually told Podesta to reply to the phishing email thinking it was legit.

No, the reply told him to reset his password and activate 2-step at the correct google link.

If you look into this more carefully, these phishing emails sent by russian group Fancy Bear look exactly like the official google ones, except with their bit.ly link obscured by a graphic icon. There's no actual evidence that's how they got his emails, btw.

They also targeted Powell among other republicans in a list of several thousand people.

No, it isn't, I'll try again.

And then for the second time in this thread after I challenged him earlier...

I don't care about anything he said after in this context. If a person wants to half-back away from an indefensible point, that's perfectly fine, but anyone with a speck of intellectual honesty shouldn't then a few days later regurgitate the exact same indefensible point.

It's really best to drop the shovel instead of continuing to dig, especially about intellectual honesty. The one and only post you linked contains the line I quoted. As mentioned previous, you simply misread the comment with "wikileaks" in quotes. When someone air-quotes something, it means they don't meant that thing but rather imply something else, ie russia in this case.

 

[ivwshane]

Are you referring to this?



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...e_s_made_a_career_of_reinventing_tyrants.html

Most of that is the Stone guy, and well before Manafort got involved with Ukraine-Russian relations. Does every person that ever rented an apartment in Trump Towers count as a person "involved" with Trump?

http://fortune.com/2016/08/15/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-paul-manafort/

 

[agent00f]

My vote is spin. Regarding why Russia may be getting in to hacking and boosting Trump over Clinton:



Russia's economy is a disaster right now, their military is broke as is the government. Just going off of Trump's previous statements on Russia, I'm sure he would be a lot friendlier to Russian relations as President than Hillary would (continuing where Obama left off). There was a blurb about the Russian military bringing out one of their smoky ships recently, complete with a tow rig for when it breaks down. Here it is.

The sanctions are hurting Russia's economy and they want them ended.

The explanation is rather simple, and same as it was back during the cold war or now in the middle east.

Russian is trying to win by supplying weapons to their enemy's enemies, a la proxy war. The latter don't even have to win per se, just grind on the opposition. Much as the taliban was our proxy in the 80's (then anti-taliban in 00's), wikileaks/assange is simply a stooge for russia at the moment, and through them the republicans.

You can't really blame the russians for trying to win, just as the US tries to advance its own interests.

 

[DrDoug]

You can't really blame the russians for trying to win, just as the US tries to advance its own interests.

Pretty much the way things have been forever... that's understood and why I recognize the threat they represent. Their economy is the big problem for Putin right now. The saber-rattling at us is meant to distract the people at home. Believe it or not, they think nuclear war with us is coming because that's what the Russian-controlled media have been hyping. Distractions, that's all Putin has right now and he's running out of those.