• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Russia hacked the RNC, but never released the emails

FIVR

FIVR

Diamond Member
https://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/russia-withheld-hacked-rnc-emails-to-help-trumps-campaign-report/



You can bet they are sitting on plenty of dirt on much of the Republican half congress, to say nothing of Trump. Dems are safe, they've almost certainly had to release everything they could to take down Hillary. I wonder how the Republicans feel knowing their emails have been hacked too? Would they perhaps be motivated to take a more conciliatory tone towards Putin because their jobs might be at stake if they piss him off?
 
This thread is a discussion about what exactly they found on the RNC. Basically, it's an innuendo thread. Since we don't know what was in the emails, we should assume the worst.



What horrible things do you think were in the RNC emails that Russia is threatening to release unless Republicans stay quiet about their involvement in the election?

I think Paul Ryan is running a nation-wide pay for play scheme with Exxon and Goldman Sachs as chief members. Trumps appointments without a doubt confirm this.
 
I think if the RNC did have emails leaked, it would be questionable if it would have affected Trump to the extent the DNC's did Clinton's. You would see a lot of similar emails about shutting down Trump, how he's not even a real Republican, etcetc, and it would only embolden his anti-establishment image further.

The RNC email server isn't going to have anything incriminating on it, because like the DNC, they aren't total idiots. Pay-for-play is going to be on private, personal email accounts.
 
Where is the evidence? I never knew you had to be Russian to have a motive or the technical skills to hack either the DNC or RNC.

So of all the computer experts and hackers there isn't one rogue hacker that just so happens to be American with the motive and ability to hack the RNC or DNC if it was really vulnerable to hacks?

This isn't like the hacker needed a huge bot net or nation owned supercomputers when it was done with social engineering.
 
Good point, Russia would never use social engineering on americans. Russia is about big bot nets and big rockets and big submarines. Igor does not understand social media, but Igor understand SNMP protocol just fine. Is like chess.
 
baydude said:
Where is the evidence? I never knew you had to be Russian to have a motive or the technical skills to hack either the DNC or RNC.

So of all the computer experts and hackers there isn't one rogue hacker that just so happens to be American with the motive and ability to hack the RNC or DNC if it was really vulnerable to hacks?

This isn't like the hacker needed a huge bot net or nation owned supercomputers when it was done with social engineering.
Click to expand...
Go to the CIA and ask them.
 
I love how not a single person ever asks this question:

Why not require that this e-mail be made public in the first place?

It's beyond clear that the "two" parties have a strangehold on our politics. The "debate commission" wouldn't even let Ralph Nader into the building and he had bought a ticket. All of the communications of the people who claim to represent us, to work for us, should be public — with just two exceptions:

1) clear security secrets
2) direct diplomatic communications between nations

And, both of those would have to be declassified after a period of time, too.

It should strike people as bizarre that the general public is constantly told it has no right to privacy — that all e-mail should be considered public. AND YET... government elites think they get private e-mail.
 
superstition said:
Why not require that this e-mail be made public in the first place?
Click to expand...
because there's a right to privacy.

correspondence to/from government officials during their time in office absolutely should be made public, and I'd apply that to Congress as well who exempted themselves from the Freedom of Information Act. but the DNC/RNC are private organizations and 99% of their staffers aren't "elites" -- they're low-paid cubicle drones trying to help causes important to them.

as well, several of the targets of having their emails hacked and released weren't even government employees at the time (John Podesta, Colin Powell)
 
superstition said:
I love how not a single person ever asks this question:

Why not require that this e-mail be made public in the first place?

It's beyond clear that the "two" parties have a strangehold on our politics. The "debate commission" wouldn't even let Ralph Nader into the building and he had bought a ticket. All of the communications of the people who claim to represent us, to work for us, should be public — with just two exceptions:

1) clear security secrets
2) direct diplomatic communications between nations

And, both of those would have to be declassified after a period of time, too.

It should strike people as bizarre that the general public is constantly told it has no right to privacy — that all e-mail should be considered public. AND YET... government elites think they get private e-mail.
Click to expand...

No, all information should not be made public. Intra-government communications should be subject to FOIA rules, but just releasing everything a politician sends is ridiculous. Dumping information is just as dangerous as not having anything released. In an information dump, it's easy to attack people and manipulate the public conversation when you can cherry pick a few choice words in a few e-mails. It's actually what some authoritarian countries like to do to help discredit any of their critics.
 
FIVR said:
This thread is a discussion about what exactly they found on the RNC. Basically, it's an innuendo thread. Since we don't know what was in the emails, we should assume the worst.



What horrible things do you think were in the RNC emails that Russia is threatening to release unless Republicans stay quiet about their involvement in the election?

I think Paul Ryan is running a nation-wide pay for play scheme with Exxon and Goldman Sachs as chief members. Trumps appointments without a doubt confirm this.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't think the content of the emails matters at all.

The real story is how likely is it that key republicans are being coerced by the Russians into keeping the contents of the emails private?

Russia is likely going to be the director of probably all our policy for the foreseeable future because of this apparent blackmail.
 
momeNt said:
Honestly I don't think the content of the emails matters at all.

The real story is how likely is it that key republicans are being coerced by the Russians into keeping the contents of the emails private?

Russia is likely going to be the director of probably all our policy for the foreseeable future because of this apparent blackmail.
Click to expand...
Tillerson is a Putin pick, period. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump was directed by a foreign power to pick that man. Where would he even find that man's name? He was just another unknown rich oil executive, one of thousands until last week. But, out of the likely hundreds of thousands if not millions of more qualified people he could nominate... he happened to pick the one that has an already negotiated deal which would benefit Putin and Russia immensely.


Mitch McConnel is on CNN right now making excuses and refusing to answer questions about the intentions of the DNC hackers. He's probably terrified that his whole party will be forever known as the "party of treason" if he tells the truth. He looks like he's been crying.
 
FIVR said:
Tillerson is a Putin pick, period. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump was directed by a foreign power to pick that man. Where would he even find that man's name? He was just another unknown rich oil executive, one of thousands until last week. But, out of the likely hundreds of thousands if not millions of more qualified people he could nominate... he happened to pick the one that has an already negotiated deal which would benefit Putin and Russia immensely.


Mitch McConnel is on CNN right now making excuses and refusing to answer questions about the intentions of the DNC hackers. He's probably terrified that his whole party will be forever known as the "party of treason" if he tells the truth. He looks like he's been crying.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if Russia becomes the world's largest oil producer by the time Trump is done. I'm just hoping he will stop short of leasing or outright selling American oil fields to his buddy Igor Sechin.

Don't shit on my face and tell me its pudding pie, Mr. President.
 
baydude said:
Where is the evidence? I never knew you had to be Russian to have a motive or the technical skills to hack either the DNC or RNC.

So of all the computer experts and hackers there isn't one rogue hacker that just so happens to be American with the motive and ability to hack the RNC or DNC if it was really vulnerable to hacks?

This isn't like the hacker needed a huge bot net or nation owned supercomputers when it was done with social engineering.
Click to expand...

Again -- they wouldn't say "the Russians" unless they had solid evidence that it was "the Russians." Ol' Donnie Boy keeps saying "Coulda been China . . . coulda been somebody here." That's really Ol' Donnie-Boy telegraphing this likely sentiment: "Oh, no! don't put the spotlight on the RUSSHH-ians!"

There are some other unresolved facts of the last year's history.

There were two school-district terror hoaxes. The first of these occurred about one day before a major GOP debate. You can be sure that every candidate repeated the mantra that we should all be very, very afraid. The second one occurred mere days before a scheduled Town Hall -- debate-equivalent in New Hampshire. The terror target for the first hoax was LA Unified School District; for the second it was NYC School District. Both of these jurisdictions either include recent real terror targets (like the Trade Center), or they are less than 50 miles from one (San Bernardino, CA).

Real terrorists wouldn't create a hoax; they would have blown up those school-kids. We still want to know who was responsible for those hoaxes.

Ultimately, there will arise enough evidence for a public to make their own judgment. Whether it meets standards for further investigation into things like Trump's e-mail accounts, I can't say. would I wish for it? Sure. Do I believe something will arise from it? Only in probabilistic terms. But the question is open.

You don't have to give up objectivity if you might welcome one or another outcome. If you were investigating any crime or just the possibility of a crime, you'd gather as much evidence as you could and produce it. Cherry-picking facts just to contrive someone's guilt is the sort of thing a Trumper would do. And we don't need to do that.
 
Jaskalas said:
Exxon.... "unknown, one of thousands" is not how I'd describe them.
Click to expand...

So you were just as aware of Tillerson's amazing expertise in offshore drilling as you are of Tim Cook or Bill Gates expertise in computers? Somehow I doubt that.
 
As for Tillerson I never heard of him before. Neither did you, right? We don't generally give a !@#$ about CEOs and rich men in gentleman's clubs. But that is where Trump would hang out. Let's not forget how much Trump talks about oil. It's probably on his mind how to monopolize the world's supply, and to scour the ranks of men who know a little bit about that. This case, a top-5 oil company isn't much of a reach.

We don't really know Trump's plans or intentions, but let's not pretend Russia is some boogieman controlling things.
 
loki8481 said:
because there's a right to privacy.
Click to expand...
No there isn't.

Ask Yahoo.

Ask the rubber stamp court that lets everything you say anywhere near any electronic gadget get plugged into a dossier in Utah. Which rubber stamp court? Good question. There are so many of them, including SCOTUS which "quietly" recently made it even easier for the feds to get your "personal" data. I guess they don't have to bother with the rubber stamp court now.

Ask Wired and all the other tech industry writers who condescendingly lecture the public about how they don't have any privacy in e-mail — that it's hilariously naive for the people to think they do.

Ask the MSM about how scary terrorists and pedos will take over your local mall if you don't hand over all privacy considerations with your hands in the air.

No, what we have here is a captured system where the two brands of the Plutocracy Party conspire against us and we're supposed to have no right to privacy while secrecy of elite machinations is sacrosanct.

Nope.

That's just as bad as Putinism, only a bit glossier in terms of the packaging.

As soon as the "Federal Elections Debate Commission" allows so-called "third-party" candidates into the debates, and not just in Perot spoiler mode, then we'll talk about how private our "two" parties' machinations should be.
 
Last edited:
superstition said:
No there isn't.

Ask Yahoo.

Ask the rubber stamp court that lets everything you say anywhere near any electronic gadget get plugged into a dossier in Utah. Which rubber stamp court? Good question. There are so many of them, including SCOTUS which "quietly" recently made it even easier for the feds to get your "personal" data. I guess they don't have to bother with the rubber stamp court now.

Ask Wired and all the other tech industry writers who condescendingly lecture the public about how they don't have any privacy in e-mail — that it's hilariously naive for the people to think they do.

Ask the MSM about how scary terrorists and pedos will take over your local mall if you don't hand over all privacy considerations with your hands in the air.

No, what we have here is a captured system where the two brands of the Plutocracy Party conspire against us and we're supposed to have no right to privacy while secrecy of elite machinations is sacrosanct.

Nope.

That's just as bad as Putinism, only a bit glossier in terms of the packaging.

As soon as the "Federal Elections Debate Commission" allows so-called "third-party" candidates into the debates, and not just in Perot spoiler mode, then we'll talk about how private our "two" parties' machinations should be.
Click to expand...
Simple.

Instant Runoff Voting as a Constitutional Amendment.
 
Something tells me this Russian hacking incident is going to get really really messy. With Trump denying and diverting wholesale about this, in my book that's de facto admitting guilt. To what extent remains to be seen.

Trump never disappoints. Looks like this thing is going to dog him indefinitely. And if I were the Dems, I'd give Trump the same treatment the Repubs gave Hillary.

After all, turnabout is fair play, isn't it?
 
i hope a russian intelligence officer gets so fucking drunk on vodka they fuck up and release the whole lot of shit. they love their vodka
 
HamburgerBoy said:
I think if the RNC did have emails leaked, it would be questionable if it would have affected Trump to the extent the DNC's did Clinton's. You would see a lot of similar emails about shutting down Trump, how he's not even a real Republican, etcetc, and it would only embolden his anti-establishment image further.

The RNC email server isn't going to have anything incriminating on it, because like the DNC, they aren't total idiots. Pay-for-play is going to be on private, personal email accounts.
Click to expand...

tweaker2 said:
Something tells me this Russian hacking incident is going to get really really messy. With Trump denying and diverting wholesale about this, in my book that's de facto admitting guilt. To what extent remains to be seen.

Trump never disappoints. Looks like this thing is going to dog him indefinitely. And if I were the Dems, I'd give Trump the same treatment the Repubs gave Hillary.

After all, turnabout is fair play, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Trump isn't going to lose any supporters even if he got paid by Putin for the Exxon CEO SoS pick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top