• 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.

Trump on Clinton Server Hack Claim: 'I Think I Read That'

Many news outlets carried the story that Russia had 20,000 of Hillary's emails and that they (Russians) were debating releasing them.

Julian Assange of Wikileaks also has claimed to have copies of Hillary's emails.

Former/retired intel and other govt officials have made claims about the certainty that Hillary's server was hacked.

IIRC, Guciffer (or what ever his is) has publicly claimed to have hacked Hillary's server and also claimed that he noticed at least 10 other hackers in her server too.

Nothing unusual or exceptional at claiming to have heard that.

Fern
 
Maybe he saw it on that TV channel showing the thousands of people in New Jersey cheering after 9/11.

I kind of wonder if Trump is actually legitimately delusional.
 
You'd have to be the biggest hack (no pun intended) or most hopelessly stupid to think her server wasn't hacked. Of course it was hacked. When these emails start getting released that will get confirmed.
 
Do you think her server wasn't hacked?

It'd be practically impossible to show that it wasn't. I actually think there's a pretty reasonable chance it was. But for someone like Trump to make an assertion then justify it with "I think I read that" is totally ridiculous. It's like he deliberately wants to sound senile. The fact that he can't actually point to a source and doesn't even appear confident that he ever even saw it after talking it up is even more embarrassing than giving an inconclusive source would be.
 
For $500,000 I would have thought someone would have bought and coughed them up by now.

We'll see.
 
Last edited:
It'd be practically impossible to show that it wasn't. I actually think there's a pretty reasonable chance it was. But for someone like Trump to make an assertion then justify it with "I think I read that" is totally ridiculous. It's like he deliberately wants to sound senile. The fact that he can't actually point to a source and doesn't even appear confident that he ever even saw it after talking it up is even more embarrassing than giving an inconclusive source would be.
I think questioning him as if it wasn't hacked is the more ridiculous position. We'll see once these emails start coming out.
 
You'd have to be the biggest hack (no pun intended) or most hopelessly stupid to think her server wasn't hacked. Of course it was hacked. When these emails start getting released that will get confirmed.

Yeah, when that happens, he can make that claim. To do so otherwise is ridiculous and bears fruit to peoples complaints that he isn't competent to be President.
 
Yeah, when that happens, he can make that claim. To do so otherwise is ridiculous and bears fruit to peoples complaints that he isn't competent to be President.
Like claiming to duck sniper fire? Good fruit indeed. Do you seriously think her server wasn't hacked? For 3 years it was running with zero encryption!
 
Sept 2015 :

Emails: Russia-linked hackers tried to access Clinton server

WASHINGTON (AP) — Russia-linked hackers tried at least five times to pry into Hillary Rodham Clinton's private email account while she was secretary of state, emails released Wednesday show. It is unclear if she clicked on any attachments and exposed her account.

June 13 2016 :

Russia Is Reportedly Set To Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails



The Russian possession of the intercepts, however, was designed also to show that, apart from violating U.S. law in the fundamental handling of classified documents ... the traffic included highly-classified materials which had their classification headers stripped.
...
The reports indicated that the decision as to whether to reveal the intercepts would be made by Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, and it was possible that the release would, if made, be through a third party, such as Wikileaks.



June 21, 2016 :

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-...rance-file-onto-web-whats-inside-them-1566702


Whistleblowing platform WikiLeaks has released a fresh 88GB 'insurance file' to the web in anticipation of a mysterious upcoming announcement – but what could be lurking inside? While the content of the elusive torrent file remains unknown, speculation is rising it may be linked to the promised data on presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

The file, which serves as a 'deadman's switch'...
 
More speculation.

Will be funny if it is cat gifs.

The whole point to begin with was that Trump is spewing unproven information that he was called out on.
 
Last edited:
Why jump to conclusions? Just wait and see what happens.
Wait? Humbug! 😱 ()🙂 The intelligence agencies aren't waiting, they have assumed it all got out you have to. Hopefully it didn't get out and sources weren't compromised. I highly doubt it wasn't hacked.
 
I read it! I wrote it down, and then I read it!

I still don't see how we're to have any faith in wikileaks either, unless they have some collaborating evidence.
 
Jeez-us

The facts: According to PolitiFact, 59% of Trump's checked claims have been deemed false or "Pants on Fire" false, versus 12% for Clinton.

Donald Trump:

True: 2%
Mostly True: 7%
Half True: 15%
Mostly False: 17%
False: 40%
Pants on Fire: 19%
Hillary Clinton:

True: 23%
Mostly True: 28%
Half True: 21%
Mostly False: 15%
False: 11%
Pants on Fire: 1%

70% of the time, drumpf is lying, seventy. I was kind and gave him the 'half true' other than that, what a fucking piece of shit. Fuck me running.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/fact-checking-trump-s-speech-n597051
 
Back
Top