Podesta's password was "password"
- Thread starter DvlDog4WVU
- Start date
Any guesses as to what the Hilldog's was? Here are my top guesses:
"MadamPresident"
"Potus"
"RightWingConspiracy"
"MadamPresident"
"Potus"
"RightWingConspiracy"
That's the supposition, but noone has clearly stated that. It's been insinuated, but not stated.
??? I thought I remember Wiki even releasing the email that Podesta sent to his nerds?
That is true, but according to Assange in last night's interview, which is worth a watch, he claimed Podesta's email password was "password".
The Clinton puppets did an amazing job , they totally misdirected everything that was in the emails to how they became public ...
I know, right? But millions of supposedly smart people are completely clueless about passwords. "password" is the #2 most commonly used password. 123456 is #1.
I don't know that I'd trust Assange. I don't see why he would indicate who his sources were or were not, or how exactly they got the information. Plus, isn't Russia giving him asylum? That would give him motivation to cover for them, or work in conjunction with them.
Ohhh.... he used and @ and a 0 instead of an "a" and an "o". Would have NEVER thought of that.
But......
This is an honest question: you don't see Assange as compromised in his bias at all? I mean, it's seems pretty obvious to me who he wanted to win the election. I'm having a hard time trusting him.
I don't think Assange cared who won. Just like Putin, his aim was not to favor one candidate or the other, but to make America look bad.
I think he is one data point. No, I wouldn't trust him unless cooperating evidence is produced.
I think that belief is extremely naive and reactionary to whom it impacted "this time". Next time it could be the GOP. He is an equal opportunity fvcker-over (official term) of people in power. He has zero incentive to care who wins the election. It just so happens the DNC provided him the fodder this go around.
With that said, I don't take everything he says as fact. He made some very cogent points that I'm in agreement with. Chief among those is what I've been saying all along, not once has anyone denied the authenticity of the emails. All they have done is try and deflect by changing the narrative to the Russians as opposed to the what was in the emails. It was a blatant attempt by the DNC and their allies to get away from the real story. That's not meant to downplay the Russians if they were in fact involved. I didn't realize this, but apparently the WaPo had to walk back the story of 17 Intel Agencies agreeing as reported on Morning Joe today. Shocker, I listen to MSNBC on my drive in in the mornings.
It's the Dem playbook.... Look at my left hand while my right steals your wallet.
It's all about who did the hacking and why and not about what was revealed in the hacks and the shittyness of the Dem nominee.
It should be a great deal about the who and the why. You don't think GOP candidates talk with press, insult voters, drink baby blood?
I'm sorry, but isn't the election over? Why would anyone care about Clinton now? Her career is over, the Dems are going to havevtobrebuild now. Why would the emails even be an issue right now?
If I were a Democrat I would still be pissed that my party acted in such a manner behind the scenes.
Again.... the faux shock and outrage about this is mind bottling. You mean foreign governments were attempting to hack public officials?
From the IBD article....
"But it didn't provide any such evidence. Instead, it simply listed tools used to carry out the attack, and asserted that Russia must have been the ones who used them.
.....
The problem is that the code identified in the report is "an outdated malware developed by Ukrainians that can be downloaded online," according to the conservative news site the Daily Caller. In other words, anyone could have used it.
The story quotes WordFence CEO Mark Maunder as saying that "there is nothing in the IP data that points to Russia specifically."
"But it didn't provide any such evidence. Instead, it simply listed tools used to carry out the attack, and asserted that Russia must have been the ones who used them.
.....
The problem is that the code identified in the report is "an outdated malware developed by Ukrainians that can be downloaded online," according to the conservative news site the Daily Caller. In other words, anyone could have used it.
The story quotes WordFence CEO Mark Maunder as saying that "there is nothing in the IP data that points to Russia specifically."
No, I mean foreign government(s) were openly trying to sway the election/weaken our democracy/publicly humiliate us. No faux outrage here. F them and their American cucks.
Why is anyone surprised at this? Hillary's ill-fated computer skills and cyber terror understanding are not uncommon among that generation. I see it all the time.
Mind bogglingIf I were a Democrat I would still be pissed that my party acted in such a manner behind the scenes.
Again.... the faux shock and outrage about this is mind bottling. You mean foreign governments were attempting to hack public officials?
I'm saying she, Podesta and probably half her staff probably thought a daily scan by Norton would keep all the cyber boogeymen away.
But she told us numerous times that she and her team take all of the necessary steps and are very aware of what needs to be done and that they take it all very very seriously....Would you like me to pull some clips to show you?
When it comes to cybersecurity, I doubt she would know what 'appropriate steps' are.
How the Democratic party thought she was a good candidate and viable as President is beyond me.