[Closed] Donald! Trump!

[url= http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/read-us-intelligence-report-russian-hacking-2016-campaign ]read the report here[/url]

Klunk - Member
read the report here

[b]Absolutely NOT trust worthy news or information.[/b] 😀

Everyone can publish a piece of interweb news to make it "real" ... 😛

Now let's try to write another piece of information that says previous admin actually pretended to be hacked.

You lot have all been taken for ride by all the media and welcome of the world of interweb news. 😆

The previous admin is trying to blame the hacking what a lame excuse.

Here's a link for you chewy, if you don't trust the media:

even trumps admitting they hacked it now chewy

i thought you trusted him?

The Russians may well have hacked the Democrats.

But that doesn't mean they also leaked the emails.

aracer - Member
Here's a link for you chewy, if you don't trust the media:

DNI.GOV "https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf"

I see the last few days of previous admin trying very hard to make the transition as difficult as possible ... 😛

kimbers - Member
even trumps admitting they hacked it now chewy
i thought you trusted him?

oldnpastit - Member
The Russians may well have hacked the Democrats.

But that doesn't mean they also leaked the emails.

as pointed out earlier on this thread on your craig murray link , wikileaks are very closely monitored

It seems they have more confidence on russians passing the info to wikileaks than they do of who actually carried out the hack

Where?
Where did he say that?
You trying to be a journo?

hey I dont make the news, I just report it 😀

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38538002

kimbers - Member

Where?
Where did he say that?
You trying to be a journo?

hey I dont make the news, I just report it

as pointed out earlier on this thread on your craig murray link , wikileaks are very closely monitored

It seems they have more confidence on russians passing the info to wikileaks than they do of who actually carried out the hack

Does the leak come from the previous admin people who have a very secure password called "password"? 😆

kimbers - Member
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38538002

Does the leak come from the previous admin people who have a very secure password called "password"?

sighhh

the password was password 'story' turned out to be a lie as gmail itself wont let you use password as a password

fake news,eh!

Trump is right because Arnold used to be a bodybuilder who got a break in Conan so apart from that what business does Arnold run successfully? Completely wrong person to be chosen for this role.

The question is when are you going to say anything meaningful.

Everything said by Trump and the supporters are meaningful because they all reject the previous administrative views.

kimbers - Member

Does the leak come from the previous admin people who have a very secure password called "password"?

sighhh

the password was password 'story' turned out to be a lie as gmail itself wont let you use password as a password

fake news,eh!

There are all over innit.

grahamh - Member

Trump is right because Arnold used to be a bodybuilder who got a break in Conan so apart from that what business does Arnold run successfully? Completely wrong person to be chosen for this role.

And which one has previously held a Political Position?

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member

The question is when are you going to say anything meaningful.

Everything said by Trump and the supporters are meaningful because they all reject the previous administrative views.

So no time soon then?

The people don't want them

slowoldman - Member

The people don't want them

I think you'll find "the people" did want them. It's the electoral college system that let Trump in.

[quote=chewkw ]Oh c'mon ... the previous admin should simply accept their defeat and then thank the people. Say thank you.

and ignore all the evidence they have about the hacking (which incidentally comes from an apolitical agency rather than the administration)?

It's like talking to a wall.... An unusually stubborn one.

Trump won fair.

if you ignore what the email hacking did to hillary's approval ratings, she lost 10 points within a week of the first leak!........

Trump won fair.

I reckon the 2017 award for supreme hypocrisy will go to the United States for complaining that a foreign government has interfered in their internal politics.

I reckon the 2017 award for supreme hypocrisy will go to the United States for complaining that a foreign government has interfered in their internal political process.

thats not an unreasonable point 🙂

ernie 🙂

Indeed, Obama had to apologsie to Merkel for the hack of her mobile.

The Democrats knew they would be a target given US / Russian relations under Obama, they where incredibly stupid. I am not sure I would describe a phishing scheme as a hack, that's more like a fool and his money are easily parted.

The Democrats knew they would be a target given US / Russian relations under Obama, they where incredibly stupid. I am not sure I would describe a phishing scheme as a hack, that's more like a fool and his money are easily parted.

the report also points out the reps were also hacked, but not leaked... its a bipartisan failure

presumably putin now sitting on material to control the reps, 2016 was the year of Vladimir!

Not leaked as nothing there ?

jambalaya - Member
Not leaked as nothing there ?

[img] [/img]

Well we just don't know jambalaya, but as you were so certain there was everything in the unhacked Clinton email server lets just assume there was some good stuff. Given how much the reps hated Trump through the campaign there could be loads. Also how could Assange have been so foolish to not know about gmails password rules? Sounds more and more like a setup every day

So apparently British Intelligence warned the US that the Russians had hacked the DNC 18 months ago

(assuming the info wasnt sexed up)

It would be unusual if Russia didnt try to influence these things whats exceptional is Trumpy's response which has been childish and idiotic.
Combine that with his tweeting guff and its like having Homer Simpson in the top job.

The Donald's response

Gross negligence by the Democratic National Committee allowed hacking to take place.The Republican National Committee had strong defense!

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/817579925771341825?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

As I said before this wasn't a hack, it was a Micky Mouse phishing attack, the head of the Democratic Campaign just fell for it hook line and sinker.

And you've fallen for the Donald's whataboutery hook line and sinker....

'Don't worry that a foreign power helped win me the election, coz they know I'm easily manipulated, instead look how silly the Dems are....'

And ignoring the fact that the reps were hacked too.

If you're gonna lie may as well be brazen about it - it seems to work better on the easily led

As I said before this wasn't a hack, it was a Micky Mouse phishing attack,

You said that before but it still isn't true.

It wasn't a "Mickey Mouse phishing attack" at all.

It was a well crafted spear-phishing attack using a targeted personalised email containing personal details and images plus a well-made clone web page behind it.

You send something like that out to a couple of thousand people, many of whom will not be tech literate, and you will always get a decent number of bites.

You said that before but it still isn't true.

It wasn't a "Mickey Mouse phishing attack" at all.

It was a well crafted spear-phishing attack using a targeted personalised email containing personal details and images plus a well-made clone web page behind it

Jambs knows that but if you repeat a lie enough, some of it will stick....

This wasn't a Mickey Mouse phishing attack. Have another read of pwnallthethings analysis:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/14-year-old-hack-john-podesta-emails_uk_586e22f0e4b0c1c826fa5510

It was a well crafted spear-phishing attack using a targeted personalised email containing personal details and images plus a well-made clone web page behind it.

You send something like that out to a couple of thousand people, many of whom will not be tech literate, and you will always get a decent number of bites.

Graham that IS mickey mouse in my view. For the Head of the Democratic Campaign to fall for it is ridiculous. If I did something like that at work I would expect it to be considered gross misconduct and be sacked.

Zigzag yes I read that the other day, seems pretty much like a 14yo hack, URL's visible, account not made private. Hardly a spook level professional hack. I need to find that image everyone posts ...

Jambs knows that but if you repeat a lie enough, some of it will stick....

Gross negligence by the Democratic National Committee allowed hacking to take place.The Republican National Committee had strong defense!

He would be reacting very differently and he would certainly not be blaming himself and his party and saying folk should get sacked.
The problem is he , like jamby, does not have any actual principles beyond self interest and they target win at all costs and nothing else matters, not the truth , not honesty, not foreign interference not credibility and certainly not facts
Its like humanity is de evolving back to the dark ages before our very eyes.

Graham that is mickey mouse in MY view.

Just to add the path url's where visible in the phishing email, anyone with an ounce of sense knows to check urls within emails before clicking on them. Last uear I got an email from a fellow STWer faked to appear as if sent from myself (name and sender/reply address) full of abuse related to the Corbyn thread. Needs a bit of IT skill to do that but nothing a 14yo techy wouldn't know.

Yep cause as well pointed out there are 2 companies those that know they were hacked and those that don't know.
Simply for the sycophants why did Russia do this, why is Trump appointing a pro Russian cabinet? What is the end game?

@captain I did a Maths/Computer Science degree so have a decent understanding. I was 14 in 1977 so it was the days of soldering irons and machine code but I have no doubt a 14yo today could come up with something far more sophisticated than Podesta was caught with. Chief muppet.

@captain I did a Maths/Computer Science degree so have a decent understanding. I was 14 in 1977 so it was the days of soldering irons and machine code but I have no doubt a 14yo today could come up with something far more sophisticated than Podesta was caught with. Chief muppet.

So jambalaya why do the Russians want Trump in charge (hint hr has already given in and accepted their involvement)

I'm hoping for a straight answer, but not expecting one. I expect a comment slagging off someone else and ignoring the question. I think we found probably make up some bs bingo cards for this thread.

Some of the allegations in the report are, shall we say, interesting. For example:

Russian Cyber Intrusions Into State and Local Electoral Boards. Russian intelligence accessed elements of multiple state or local electoral boards. Since early 2014, Russian intelligence has researched US electoral processes and related technology and equipment.
DHS assesses that the types of systems we observed Russian actors targeting or compromising are not involved in vote tallying.

Now, call me an old cynic, but doesn't "accessed elements of" and "researched" actually indicate that may have done nothing more nefarious than read a publically available website that details the electoral process/rules?

So, essentially, if I clicked on and read [url= http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-systems/ ]www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voting-systems/[/url] would that not quite clearly constitute "accessing elements of a state electoral board" and "researching US electoral processes and related technology and equipment"

Clever wording reveals a lot sometimes doesn't it?

jambas mini me has just turned up.

call me an old cynic, but doesn't "accessed elements of" and "researched" actually indicate that may have done nothing more nefarious than read a publically available website that details the electoral process/rules?

Accessing elements of is not researching.If they meant just researching then that is what they would have said.

I researched your address
I accessed your address

Call me an old cynic but you are not as daft as be incapable of seeing the distinction between the two.

Interesting you chose the most vague point in the report its almost as if you have an agenda of disingenuous spin and want to ignore the broad thrust for your won agenda
Even given that that point was spectacularly poor even by your low standards /desperation

Clever wording reveals a lot sometimes doesn't it?

Just to add the path url's where visible in the phishing email,

Didn't they just change one letter ?

Admittedly still like to think there'd be tougher checks on incoming mails

Here we are (binners is always posting this), Podesta. Chief Muppet.

[img] [/img]

Even if it was just changing 1 letter that's trivial to do and costs a few $ to register a site

@mike Obama has been p.ssing off Russia and visa versa, why do you think they took Snowden in. Who knows what else he has told the Russians in retrun for sanctuary. Easy to see Putin thinking anyone but Hillary is a good plan.

why do you think they took Snowden in. Who knows what else he has told the Russians in retrun for sanctuary. Easy to see Putin thinking anyone but Hillary is a good plan.

Never trust a Russian, what Trumps game of cosying up to Russia and Putin is anyone guess, but it isn't very smart.

Also shows how thick Assange and Snowden are, just disposable pawns in a much bigger game.

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member
The question is when are you going to say anything meaningful.

Everything said by Trump and the supporters are meaningful because they all reject the previous administrative views.

So no time soon then?

Oh c'mon ... the previous admin should simply accept their defeat and then thank the people. Say thank you

No, didn't think so
I blame health'n'safety myself - too many stupid people still around who should have killed themselves off Darwin-style before being able to vote or breed

Let's see Dragon. Obama hasn't handled Russia well at all. War in Ukraine with Crimea annexed, Assad victorious in Syria.

Just to add the path url's where visible in the phishing email, anyone with an ounce of sense knows to check urls within emails before clicking on them.

No they weren't - not according to the reporting that I've read (and you say you have read).

They were all shortened via bit.ly

The URL in Podesta's email was bit.ly/1PibSU0

Which when followed took him to this:
[img] :large[/img]

And yes, at that point he [i]might[/i] have spotted that there was a dash in the address where there should be a slash, but that's pretty easy for a non-technical person to miss, especially if they were on a mobile browser that only shows part of the address at a time and doesn't handily highlight the domain part, as Chrome does in that screenshot.

I'm sure plenty of folk on here would have been fooled by that.

Zigzag yes I read that the other day, seems pretty much like a 14yo hack, URL's visible, account not made private.

URLs were not visible as discussed.

Yes the bit.ly API account activity was not private, but that just meant researchers were able to look at the other shortened URLs that the hacker(s) had generated via that account.

There is some [url= https://www.secureworks.com/research/threat-group-4127-targets-google-accounts ]more good analysis here[/url] which discusses the kind of folk that this hacker group (TG-4127) was targeting. Basically lots of stuff Russians might be interested in (defence, US/UK/NATO military, political, journalists writing about Russia & Ukraine)

It also notes the success of the attack:

CTU researchers analyzed 4,396 phishing URLs sent to 1,881 Google Accounts between March and September, 2015. [b]More than half (59%) of the URLs were accessed[/b], suggesting that the recipients at least opened the phishing page.

Like I said, a well-crafted spear-phishing email gets a lot of bites!

and yet more swamp draining going on with his son in law, who is definatly not got any conflicts of interest at all
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/07/us/politics/jared-kushner-trump-business.html
and just happened to be one of the 2 that BoJo met this week
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38549807 ]Boris Johnson met Mr Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kuchner, and Steve Bannon, the US president-elect's strategist.[/url]

Mr. Kushner played a pivotal role in persuading Mr. Trump, who made the Wall Street powerhouse Goldman Sachs a bête noire of his presidential campaign, to appoint the firm’s president, Gary D. Cohn, as his chief economic adviser, according to several people involved in the transition. (Like a number of people interviewed for this article, they spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal matters.) Goldman Sachs has lent the Kushner Companies money and is an investor in a real estate technology company co-founded by Mr. Kushner and his brother.

Indeed, despite a lack of foreign policy experience, Mr. Kushner is emerging as an important figure at a crucial moment for some of America’s most complicated diplomatic relationships. Such is his influence in the geopolitical realm that transition officials have told the Obama White House that foreign policy matters that need to be brought to Mr. Trump’s attention should be relayed through his son-in-law, according to a person close to the transition and a government official with direct knowledge of the arrangement.
So when the Chinese ambassador to the United States called the White House in early December to express what one official called China’s “deep displeasure” at Mr. Trump’s break with longstanding diplomatic tradition by speaking by phone with the president of Taiwan, the White House did not call the president-elect’s national security team. Instead, it relayed that information through Mr. Kushner, whose company was not only in the midst of discussions with Anbang but also has Chinese investors.

Ordered myself one of these, though I haven't decided if I'm brave enough to wear it in public... I'm in a very red state! [img] [/img]

So Johnson has been sent to see the Trump team, will heeven get access to the man of which he has said is

quite clearly crazy'

“What he’s doing is playing the game of the terrorists and those who seek to divide us. That’s exactly the kind of reaction they hope to produce.”

“I think he’s betraying a quite stupefying ignorance that makes him frankly unfit to hold the office of President of the United States.

“I would invite him to come and see the whole of London and take him round the city – except I wouldn’t want to expose any Londoners to any unnecessary risk of meeting Donald Trump.”

“The only reason I wouldn't visit some parts of New York is the real risk of meeting Donald Trump.”

Its a really good job Trump doesn't have paper thin skin and a history harbouring grudges 😯

Its a really good job Trump doesn't have paper thin skin and a history harbouring grudges

BJ has definitely not been snubbed at all. Oh no. Certainly not. Not being sidelined or ignored whatsoever.

Jamba what would you have liked America to do about Syria? Invade? Assassinate Assad? If they had got more involved than helping some anti government forces then there would of been a real danger of a civil war escalating into a major conflict.
In the UN it seemed they tried to broker some stuff but were unsuccessful.
So what should they have done?

Pigface - Member

So what should they have done?

Very simple - Merica & UN stay out of Syria.

and Russia?

mikewsmith - Member
and Russia?

help them do what? bomb people? Cover up chemical weapons? It's not really answering the question is it. But then again whats the point in asking

So you're not worried about all the allegations against Assad and Putin, let me guess it's all a media conspiracy and all the countries that think he's committed war crimes are lying and have underlying motives.

mikewsmith - Member
help them do what? bomb people? Cover up chemical weapons? It's not really answering the question is it. But then again whats the point in asking

They can do as they wish because Syria has never been the alliance to the West.

The West can stay out rather than being the trouble makers like they already are by encouraging "democracy".

Stay out.

all the countries that think he's committed war crimes are lying and have underlying motives.

That's a reasonable assessment, other than the fact that all sides in all wars commit war crimes.

This is a particularly interesting article, which I suspect you won't read, written by the associate editor of The Spectator and a former chief political commentator for The Daily Telegraph, so someone who can probably be described as having Conservative views :

[url= http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/time-judge-assads-aleppo-campaign-standards-set-mosul/ ]It’s time to judge Assad’s Aleppo campaign by the standards that we set ourselves in Mosul[/url]

I'm not naive enough to think that war crimes don't happen on both sides and I don't remember saying that only one side should be held accountable. But I don't think the US leaving would stop all the dreadful things happening and I certainly wouldn't be pro Putin or Assad as some people on here appear to be.

I'm not naive enough to think that war crimes don't happen on both sides

And given that Trump has openly said that he supports [url= http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/trump-torture/ ]the use of torture "much stronger than waterboarding"[/url] and [url= http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/dec/17/rand-paul/rand-pauls-right-geneva-conventions-bar-donald-tru/ ]killing the civilian families of combatants[/url], he'd be an odd choice if you want to end them.

killing the civilian families of combatants,

Bloody hell, he really did, I missed that.

and now hes said meryl streep is overrated ! the git,

Im hardly a fan of her films, but he really is just a petulant child!

just stop lying, say it was wrong and donate some of your billions to a disabled charity or something

[img] [/img]

no wonder putin has him in his pocket, hes so easy to stimulate a response from

openly said that he supports the use of

Oh, look, you cherry picked your sources without commenting that Trump subsequently took advice from one of his experts and followed it

http://uk.businessinsider.com/james-mattis-trump-torture-2016-11?r=US&IR=T

Just imagine, a president who listens to the experts rather than entrench himself in dogma, who would have believed it?

Trump mocks reporter with disability

You think that people shouldn't be mocked, just because they have a disability? How demeaning is that?

I think the point is he shouldn't have even considered it in the first place, you shouldn't need to tell the president elect that he should be against war crimes.

you shouldn't need to tell the president elect that he should be against war crimes.

C'mon the USA has been carrying out extra-judicial killings abroad for yonks. Usually with drones but sometimes up close and personal (OBL).

you shouldn't need to tell the president elect that he should be against war crimes.

You mean like how Obama was going to close down Guantanamo?

Oh, look, you cherry picked your sources without commenting that Trump subsequently took advice from one of his experts and followed it

I didn't cherry pick anything - I deliberately linked to FactCheck and PolitiFact coverage to be as neutral as possible.

Both stories were widely reported and you can listen to Trump say the words himself.

When challenged on both issues he became further entrenched and doubled down on his support.

He only moderated his viewpoint on torture [i]after[/i] he was elected, as your link and the NY Times interview shows, as part of his more general rollback on his campaign issues.

ninfan - Member

You think that people shouldn't be mocked, just because they have a disability? How demeaning is that?

no, you can mock them as much as you want, just dont use their disability to do it, the same as you wouldnt with their race or sexuality

thats pretty obvious, I shouldnt be surprised that needs explaining to you, but I am!

He only moderated his viewpoint on torture after he was elected, as your link and the NY Times interview shows, as part of his more general rollback on his campaign issues.

So what's your problem with that then?

We just have to take him for what he is. A sociopathic imbecile and intellectual lightweight.

You mean like how Obama was going to close down Guantanamo?

Remind us why that didn't happen ...

thats pretty obvious, I shouldnt be surprised that needs explaining to you, but I am!

Of course ninfan should understand that, but when you're morally bankrupt, any turd looks like a stone to throw.

Can we shut this thread for a year and then come back and see how much damage has been done. That is if he hasn't got bill gates to shut down the cyber in the meantime.