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

(11-03-2016 10:54 AM)Nacho Wrote:  You could mock up 600,000 emails in a matter of seconds?

There once was a poster named DesertBronco who could've done it.

Quote:Isn't the burden of proof on the guy doing the "leaking"?

Not if we are discussing this question

Quote:Has ANYONE produced ANY EVIDENCE proving the Russians are responsible for Wikileaks content?

If you are going to continue to ignore this question, then sure, we change the subject and talk about whether the information from Wikileaks is legitimate.

You are questioning it. As should EVERYONE.

This is what I've observed.

This leaked information is wreaking havoc amongst the democrats and the political establishment.

Of the people that have the MOST to lose (Hillary, Podesta, the DNC, the neocons, much of the MSM, etc) NOBODY is making a serious case that the information is false.

And that silence is deafening.

One person (Donna Bazille) tried to make that case.

Then more information was leaked.

And this seasoned, high ranking, powerful, "connected", democrat was fired by one of the most left-leaning news organizations in this country.

How do you interpret/process this?

Quote:I could mock up emails and conversations and dupe the audience in a matter of hours.

Yeah. I'm sure you could. That's why I asked your opinion about this issue earlier

I also suspect that if someone were to falsify emails in an attempt to publicly make you look bad, you'd be able to prove they were doctored. No?

And I think that the US Government would/should have the brainpower and money (not to mention the EXTREME MOTIVATION) to do the same with the Wikileaks materials.

But instead, the best anyone can come up with are vague accusations directed toward "the Russians"? With no evidence?

Really?

Quote:Not if we are discussing this question

I don't care who the source is, I doubt the credibility of even releasing valid info, let alone in any context.

Quote:I also suspect that if someone were to falsify emails in an attempt to publicly make you look bad, you'd be able to prove they were doctored. No?

How? Explain. Emails by their nature are a terrible audit trail and unreliable. Especially if on a POP Server. I find the people getting worked up about an email server seem pretty clueless to the content, security of any emails, and treat it as if it's a secure database. It's not. Governments are notorious for putting too much info in emails as attachments, unencrypted, and sensitive. It's not a "Hilary thing".

Such a red herring.

Quote:And I think that the US Government would/should have the brainpower and money (not to mention the EXTREME MOTIVATION) to do the same with the Wikileaks materials.

That would be the same government that got phished by him a few years earlier, they're not that sophisticated. He claims to be a sophisticated hacker. He's not. He's a con/phish artist with an extreme motivation.

I don't trust anything he puts forth, whether it suits my position or not.

Quote:How? Explain.

I can't

Not close.

That's why I have asked you. Now for the 3rd time?

Quote:I don't trust anything he puts forth, whether it suits my position or not.

I'm not asking you to.

But the people hurt most by these "revelations" aren't trying to discredit them.

Why aren't they using your argument?

(11-02-2016 10:09 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  helping to get 911 funding to NYC.

What's wrong with getting 911 funding? When I'm having a heart attack, I want to at least know in the cockles of my heart that the paramedics are going to show up.

(11-03-2016 07:29 PM)ESSSS Wrote:  

Quote:How? Explain.

I can't

Not close.

That's why I have asked you. Now for the 3rd time?

Quote:I don't trust anything he puts forth, whether it suits my position or not.

I'm not asking you to.

But the people hurt most by these "revelations" aren't trying to discredit them.

Why aren't they using your argument?

I'm not sure why. They're coming across as unsophisticated as Assange.

They're paralyzed. Analysis paralysis style. I'd have crushed that guy first release. He'd have ran out of that embassy.

(11-03-2016 09:11 PM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(11-02-2016 10:09 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  helping to get 911 funding to NYC.

What's wrong with getting 911 funding? When I'm having a heart attack, I want to at least know in the cockles of my heart that the paramedics are going to show up.

9/11 not 9-1-1. Nothing is wrong, but that's her only real accomplishment in 30 years as politician.

Quote:They're coming across as unsophisticated

Maybe so with respect to technology.

But it's HARD for me to wrap my mind around your position.

You are saying that of the tens of thousands of emails that have been released, and of the dozens if not hundreds of "damaging" emails, it is unrealistic expect anyone to produce even 1 original email to prove this alleged "doctoring"?

Because from a political perspective, it would take only one example to achieve what the Democrats want/need. It would then be "game, set, and match".

I would argue that the Clinton machine is NOT politically unsophisticated.

Not even close.

And that this Russian narrative has been carefully crafted and produced to achieve the political end that they most desire.

What better way to shore up the base, change the subject, and appeal to the much of the Republican base?

But that pattern keeps repeating itself. NOT ONE EXAMPLE to support this position.

They're politically sophisticated, then so is our football coach and president. That's nothing new. Tons of people can manipulate and cajole, doesn't make them geniuses. It makes them, azzholes.

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.

Their position is to pretty much ignore these and let the spin, screaming start and not acknowledge there's even a problem or issue. Chicago style.

Like I said, I'd have had that guy scrambling out of that embassy day one. Screw him, he's an anarchist and I've had an instant dislike for him from the get go, even when he was trashing the Iraq War effort. He didn't care who he hurt, who he helped, he is in this for one reason.

(11-02-2016 07:17 PM)ESSSS Wrote:  

(11-02-2016 07:01 PM)MajorHoople Wrote:  

(11-02-2016 06:33 PM)ESSSS Wrote:  Thanks for the article reference, though.

You're welcome.

Perhaps others who read it slower with a more discerning eye will "get" the point of the article, regardless of their political persuasion.

So....I'll try again

Has anyone here seen evidence establishing that the Russians are responsible for the Wikileaks material?

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?

It's possible Assange and the Russians could be working independently, Assange phishing, and the Russians doing their sophisticated operations.

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.

How is Trump a communist?

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

Is that good?

Bad?

(11-04-2016 11:35 AM)Nacho Wrote:  How is Trump a communist?

Misogynist, narcissist, egoist, racist.

Not to mention his failures as a "business man."

Even if he isn't a Communist - should he be Chief Executive, Commander in Chief, "leader of the Free World"?

(11-04-2016 12:04 PM)ESSSS Wrote:  

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

Is that good?

Bad?

What's your opinion?

I'd take all 12 or 14 candidates that ran against him as GOP candidates over him. Serious. Even that whack job governor Perry. This is an unbelievable indictment on our society that he has a real chance to win.

Welp, emails have been authenticated by Google DKIM.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/794...wsrc%5Etfw

DKIM is weak. Full of false positives and they're still using outdated sha-1 encryption. Please.

The fact that he's releasing these now instead of them being vetted in time is REALLY SKETCHY. Plus, he cherry picked Donna Brazil's to show it was verified. He's as politically motivated as they come.

(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.

Video released today by Redstate Editor

(11-04-2016 07:47 PM)Chibronco 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.

Video released today by Redstate Editor

Please, Clintons' have a definite track record of disregard for moral or legal standards. Bill's recent denial of his negative statements about O'Bama Care is just a typical example of the Clinton's. But what would expect from a President that committed perjury because he didn't have guts to stand up admit what he had done. My wife always said that she would have more respect for Hillary if she would have dumped him.