Glenn Greenwald (darling of progressives): The deep state is at war with Trump

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Monday, June 23, 2025 20:15
VIEWED: 3900
PAGE 1 of 1

SIGNYM

Sunday, January 15, 2017 12:38 PM

Quote:
The number one foreign policy priority of the CIA over the last four to five years has been the proxy war they're waging in Syria to remove Bashar Al Assad - and Hillary Clinton was quite critical of Obama for constraining them. She wanted to escalate that war to unleash the CIA, to impose a no-fly zone in Syria to confront Russia, whereas Trump took the exact opposite position. He said we have no business in Syria trying to change the government, we ought to let the Russia and Assad go free and killing ISIS and Al Quaeda and whoever else they want to kill.

He [Trump] was a threat to the CIA's primary institutional priority of regime change in Syria. Beyond that, Clinton wanted a much more confrontational and belligerent posture towards Moscow, which the CIA has been acrimonious with for decades, whereas Trump wanted better relations. They viewed Trump as a threat to their institutional pre-eminence to their ability to get their agenda imposed on Washington.

What you're seeing is actually quite dangerous. There really is at this point obvious open warefare between this un-elected, but very powerful faction that resides in Washington and sees Presidents come and go - on the one hand, and the person that the American democracy elected to be elected on the other. There's clearly extreme conflict and subversion taking place. '

SIGNYM

Monday, January 16, 2017 7:13 PM

Glenn Greenwald, in his [edited]own words

Quote:
The Deep State Goes to War With President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer

In January 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.

This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump.

This is also the faction that included Hillary Clinton and GWB, btw

Quote:
They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”

Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss, as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason

and reality

Quote:
with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry, and damaging those behaviors might be.

The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There is a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combating those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.

But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality.

One in which KRAPO, SECONDRATE, WISHIWASHY, and GSTRING and SHINNY enthusiastically support. Curiously, the only person out of that usual clusterfuck who wasn't taken in by fake news was THUGR. And the only one who didn't comment at all was MAL4.

Quote:
And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it./

Not that being morally bankrupt and completely irrational is anathema to the Gang of Seven.

Quote:
Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump opponents can do for him than attacking him with such lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting large media outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose actual Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to believe the people and institutions who have demonstrated they are willing to endorse any assertions no matter how factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic tactic no matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of ensuring accuracy?

Indeed

Quote:
All of these toxic ingredients were on full display yesterday as the Deep State unleashed its tawdriest and most aggressive assault yet on Trump: vesting credibility in and then causing the public disclosure of a comple

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

SIGNYM

Monday, January 16, 2017 7:20 PM

Another darling of the progressives and also no fan of Trump - Matt Taibbi- says Trump was right about the media:

Quote:
Insane Clown President: Dispatches from the 2016 Circus

The media and politicians had spent so much time with each other that they lost touch with regular people, and Trump capitalized on that. He made us in the media villains, representative of this out of touch, ivory tower political culture," he said.

"I think there's some fairness to it, as much as I dislike Donald Trump, he hit a note, several notes, in this campaign that were true, and that was one of them."

Another one, he says, is Washington corruption.

Taibbi believes Trump was correct to say that both Democrats and Republicans have become more beholden to their political donors than to their constituents, and his vow to "drain the swamp" struck a chord.

In a recent article

Quote:
"We journalists made the same mistake the Republicans made, the same mistake the Democrats made. We were too sure of our own influence, too lazy to bother hearing things firsthand, and too in love with ourselves to imagine that so many people could hate and distrust us as much as they apparently do.

It's too late for any of us to fix this colossal misread and lapse in professional caution. Now all we can do is wait to see how much this failure of vision will cost the public we supposedly serve. Just like the politicians, our job was to listen, and we talked instead. Now America will do its own talking for a while. The world may never forgive us for not seeing this coming."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-15/matt-taibbi-insane-clown-pres
ident-trump-was-right-about-media

But he doesn't think Americans should hold their breath for their incoming president to fix any of the issues at the heart of his campaign rhetoric.

"Even though his diagnoses on some things in some cases are accurate, it's his solutions that are the problem," Taibbi said. "He's not a deep thinker and his instincts for fixing everything are purely authoritarian."

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND

REAVERFAN

Monday, January 16, 2017 8:34 PM

Meh. It's easier to believe Trump did all that crap than to believe he didn't.

He's that awful.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Monday, January 16, 2017 11:24 PM

That's what the MSM is banking on half of the country doing reaverfan.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

1KIKI

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 1:34 AM

Quote:
Hey! You just described RT.com!

BTW - Should I stop asking you to provide evidence to back your claims, since you never do? Lemme' know!

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

SECOND

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 3:30 AM

The Real Reason Any Russian Meddling Is an Emergency
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/16/the-real-reason-any-russian-meddli
ng-is-an-emergency/

by Jon Schwarz, January 16 2017, 8:18 a.m.

The bizarre saga of potential Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election has created a genuine emergency in American politics. This isn’t necessarily because of Russia’s actual actions — unless the most peculiar allegations turn out to be accurate — but because of Donald Trump’s response, and what this indicates about how he’ll govern.

Ignore the Trump “dossier” for the moment and forget the baseless conjecture about Russia hacking the U.S. voting process itself. All we need to know about Trump and the Republican Party can be found in their position on the simplest, most plausible part of the story: that Russia was behind the hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and John Podesta.

Is this in fact what happened? Certainly the Obama administration did itself no favors by failing to release any of the evidence underlying the strong conclusions in the the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s report. But Trump himself said at last week’s press conference, presumably based on a classified briefing, that “I think it was Russia.” Mike Pompeo, Trump’s nominee to run the Central Intelligence Agency, agreed during his confirmation hearings. There’s also the crucial dog that hasn’t barked: Unlike during the lead up to the Iraq War, no one from the intelligence agencies has been leaking doubts or claims that they’re being leaned on by the White House to provide the desired conclusion.

Under these circumstances, the reaction of anyone who actually cares about the United States has to be: We must investigate this with great seriousness and impartiality and find out exactly what happened. This requires an independent commission with sufficient funding, a broad mandate and legal authority that Congress creates but then can no longer influence.

Nothing should be less controversial than this. Whatever a nation’s political disagreements, in any functioning democracy there’s just one position on this issue: Only citizens can participate in deciding who governs it.

In every other circumstance Republicans love wrapping themselves in the flag and vowing to protect us from dastardly foreigners, even if this requires renaming the french fries in the congressional cafeteria. Few do this more than Trump himself, whose entire campaign was about the apocalyptic danger posed to us by China, Mexico, the freeloaders of NATO, Muslims from anywhere, and so on. Yet on the subject of Russia and this election he’s suddenly indifferent — even though fear of this type of foreign influence doesn’t require jingoistic xenophobia but just a rational, healthy belief in small-d democratic self-determination.

This is one of the key topics of George Washington’s 1796 Farewell Address, the most famous political rhetoric in American history until the Gettysburg Address. “Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence,” Washington warned, “the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”

Washington was particularly concerned by the “common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party” – that is, loyalty to your own faction within the country above the country overall. This, he said, “opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions” and allows other countries to “practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils.”

Trump and the GOP are now busy proving how prescient Washington was. Trump has not endorsed an independent investigation of any Russian actions aimed at the election, nor released the financial information that would clarify any business relationships he has with Russians or Russian

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 3:37 AM

I guess the bottom line is, what exactly were in those documents that Russia supposedly hacked?

If you answered dozens, perhaps hundreds of reasons why Hillary Clinton was unfit for the Presidency, you get a gold star.

Russia is a big place. Maybe Anonomyous was hacking the DNC from his mom's basement, who happened to have a zip code in Moscow?

There's still been no proof. Show me proof.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

1KIKI

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 3:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by G:
Hey! You just described RT.com!

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
BTW - Should I stop asking you to provide evidence to back your claims, since you never do? Lemme' know!

Quote:
Originally posted by G:
By your own definition and my experience there's nothing I could provide you with that you would believe or accept as evidence, so yes, shut the f*ck up.

What definition did *I* give? Or should I stop asking you to provide evidence to back your claims, since you never do? Lemme' know!

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

1KIKI

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 3:59 AM

Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts? Because - he lied right at the start. When he claims that Russia was behind the DNC and Podesta files, and the people WHO ACTUALLY RECEIVED THEM STATED UNEQUIVOCALLY THEY CAME FROM A LEAKER, NOT A HACKER, AND NOT RUSSIA - it just ruins his credibility - and yours, SECOND, for ignoring facts - right there.

So - aside from being a liar - Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts? Is he - an intelligence analyst with hard data? A cybersecurity expert? A bloviating piece of an echo chamber?

SECOND, YOU seem to give him some credit. But, can you answer the question, SECOND? Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts?

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

SECOND

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 4:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Russia is a big place. Maybe Anonomyous was hacking the DNC from his mom's basement, who happened to have a zip code in Moscow?

There's still been no proof. Show me proof.

There are, of course, endless potential quibbles with and distractions from the central reality that the DNC was hacked. But none of them amount to much.

Do we know that the release of emails changed the outcome of the election? No, and it’s possible they didn’t. So what? Interference in our elections should be unacceptable under any circumstances. Even if the hack came from Anonomyous' mom's basement

Aren’t we hugely hypocritical for complaining about this, given America’s overbearing interventions in dozens of other countries? It depends on who “we” are. Yes, the CIA and U.S. political leaders have no grounds to object to this. But regular Americans do, just as regular Iranians, Guatemalans, Chileans and many, many others have every right to object to what we’ve done.

1KIKI

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 4:47 AM

SECOND

Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts?

Because - he lied right at the start. When he claims that Russia was behind the DNC and Podesta files, and the people WHO ACTUALLY RECEIVED THEM STATED UNEQUIVOCALLY THEY CAME FROM A LEAKER, NOT A HACKER, AND NOT RUSSIA - it just ruins his credibility - and yours, SECOND, for ignoring facts - right there.

So - aside from being a liar - Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts? Is he - an intelligence analyst with hard data? A cybersecurity expert? A bloviating piece of an echo chamber?

SECOND, YOU seem to give him some credit. But, can you answer the question, SECOND? Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts?

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

SECOND

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 6:56 AM

Originally posted by 1kiki:

SECOND, YOU seem to give him some credit. But, can you answer the question, SECOND? Who is John Schwartz, and why should I care about what he posts?

Jon Schwarz wrote this story for The Intercept https://theintercept.com/staff/jonschwarz/

The Intercept was co-founded by Glenn Greenwald. https://theintercept.com/staff/glenn-greenwald/

The thread is titled “Glenn Greenwald (darling of progressives) ...”

Glenn Greenwald and Jon Schwarz work together, with Greenwald editing Schwarz’s writing, including this story. There is one degree of separation between Greenwald and Schwarz. It could only be closer if they were the same person writing under two different names.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 9:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Russia is a big place. Maybe Anonomyous was hacking the DNC from his mom's basement, who happened to have a zip code in Moscow?

There's still been no proof. Show me proof.
There are, of course, endless potential quibbles with and distractions from the central reality that the DNC was hacked. But none of them amount to much.

Do we know that the release of emails changed the outcome of the election? No, and it’s possible they didn’t. So what? Interference in our elections should be unacceptable under any circumstances. Even if the hack came from Anonomyous' mom's basement

Aren’t we hugely hypocritical for complaining about this, given America’s overbearing interventions in dozens of other countries? It depends on who “we” are. Yes, the CIA and U.S. political leaders have no grounds to object to this. But regular Americans do, just as regular Iranians, Guatemalans, Chileans and many, many others have every right to object to what we’ve done.

Once again you prove that you and I probably agree a lot on most things, when we're not too busy arguing about all the Bullshit the MSM shovels on us.

Yes, I do have a problem with "entities" meddling in our elections. Yes, it is also hypocritical of us as a nation to object to it when we have been doing it since after WWII.

I do think that the emails actually had a lot to do with the outcome of the election. To somebody who is a die hard Liberal, such as yourself, it didn't mean much. You were always going to vote for Hillary and you likely surround yourself with like minded individuals and share that particular echo chamber.

It was the "Middle" that voted against her after voting twice for Obama that would have been swayed by what was in those emails. And trust me... If you weren't wearing those blinders there was A LOT of bad stuff in those emails.

Part of me is grateful to whoever hacked them so we could see the truth of the Clintons and the DNC and the MSM and all of the collusion that has been going on.

Another part of me gets a little kick out of the fact that our Government can still even be hacked. I guess it's not Orwell's 1984 just yet.

But another part of me does find this extremely alarming. Whoever did hack the DNC and Hillary's illegal server only showed us the damning evidence against her and her cronies. I'm sure they got a lot more information than that. Who knows what secrets they know? Who are they? Will we suffer major consequences down the road on topics we haven't even imagined if those in possession of this information has nefarious intentions?

At least though, it seems to be that we can agree that until there is actual proof that it was indeed Russian Agents that hacked the emails that we shouldn't be so quick to just go along with that story.

Sure, I want to know who did it. I think odds are about 99-to-1 that the CIA has known all along and we will never know. It will be a mystery like JFK.

All I can say for sure is that it certainly is a good weapon to keep all of us idiots on the bottom of the chain fighting each other instead of doing something productive.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

1KIKI

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 9:57 AM

FBI dispute with DNC over hacked servers may fuel doubt on Russia role
The FBI never gained access to the DNC's hacked servers, instead relying on evidence provided from CrowdStrike

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3155227/security/fbi-dispute-with-dnc-o
ver-hacked-servers-may-fuel-doubt-on-russia-role.html

The FBI may have been forced into a misstep when investigating whether Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee -- the agency never directly examined the DNC servers that were breached.

Instead, the FBI had to rely on forensic evidence provided by third-party cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which the DNC hired to mitigate the breach.

“The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed,” the agency said on Thursday in a statement.

The incident threatens to spark more skepticism over whether the U.S. properly arrived at its conclusion that Russian cyberspies were responsible for the breach.

“The FBI may have all the evidence or not,” said John Bambenek, a researcher with Fidelis Cybersecurity. “But this case has been handled so unusually, it gives everyone a reason to latch on and cast doubt.”

News that the FBI failed to directly examine the hacked servers came on Wednesday, when Buzzfeed reported that a DNC spokesman said that the agency had never requested access.

On Thursday, the FBI contested that claim, saying the denial of access "caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier."

It's unclear why the DNC allegedly blocked access to the servers. But companies that have been breached are sometimes fearful of exposing sensitive data to outside parties, said Andrei Barysevich, a director at security firm Recorded Future.

“The FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton at the time (over her private email server),” he said. “So it’s totally possible, the DNC didn’t want them involved at any stage of the investigation because of that.”

Nor can the FBI force an affected party to turn a server over, Barysevich said. However, the whole incident may raise questions over whether federal agents saw all the evidence related to the breach. “CrowdStrike is not obligated to share everything with law enforcement,” Barysevich said. “That could have potentially interfered with the investigation.”

CrowdStrike didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. But it wasn’t the only private security firm to examine the breach. Fidelis Cybersecurity was brought in to look at the malware samples, and concluded that suspected elite Russian hackers were behind the intrusion.

Nevertheless, the FBI should have conducted its own review of the hacked servers, Bambenek said. “This is a highly political case, and perception matters,” he said. "In this situation, they need to be building credibility."

Critics might now question if the FBI missed pieces of evidence in its investigation or if U.S. intelligence agencies rushed to blame Russia for the hack.

“You’re telling me the law enforcement community didn’t actually look at the (server) drives themselves? Are you trying to sow conspiracy theories?” Bambenek said.

U.S. intelligence agencies, including the FBI, have blamed the DNC breach and other high-profile political hacks on the Kremlin attempting to influence last year’s election. To retaliate, the White House last month expelled Russian diplomats from the U.S. and ordered sanctions against the country.

U.S. President Barack Obama may very well shed more light on why the U.S. believes Russia was involved. He has ordered U.S. intelligence agencies to come out with a full report that will detail the Kremlin's role in the election-related hacks. A declassified version of that report is scheduled to become public on Monday.

However incoming President Donald Trump remains skeptical that Russia is to blame. His camp previously rejected U.S. in

SECOND

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 6:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Once again you prove that you and I probably agree a lot on most things, when we're not too busy arguing about all the Bullshit the MSM shovels on us.

Yes, I do have a problem with "entities" meddling in our elections. Yes, it is also hypocritical of us as a nation to object to it when we have been doing it since after WWII.

I do think that the emails actually had a lot to do with the outcome of the election. To somebody who is a die hard Liberal, such as yourself, it didn't mean much. You were always going to vote for Hillary and you likely surround yourself with like minded individuals and share that particular echo chamber.

It was the "Middle" that voted against her after voting twice for Obama that would have been swayed by what was in those emails. And trust me... If you weren't wearing those blinders there was A LOT of bad stuff in those emails.

6ixStringJack, let us find something more to agree about.

A trio of researchers takes a broad look at the evidence that FBI Director James Comey affected the election. Their conclusion:

The evidence is clear, and consistent, regarding the Comey effect. The timing of the shift both at the state and national levels lines up very neatly with the publication of the letter, as does the predominance of the story in the media coverage from the final week of the campaign. With an unusually large number of undecided voters late in the campaign, the letter hugely increased the salience of what was the defining critique of Clinton during the campaign at its most critical moment.

www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1/11/14215930/comey-email-election-clint
on-campaign

If it weren't for Comey, Hillary Clinton would have won the popular vote by about 6 points and the Electoral College by 70 or more. And that might have turned into control of the Senate as well, though that's a little more speculative.

Three times the director of the FBI (a Republican) accused Hillary of being a criminal and three times the FBI said it did not have evidence to prove it, but it would keep trying until it did. The FBI never did that to anybody in Organized Crime, but the FBI did it in a Presidential Election.

6ixStringJack and I can agree on one thing: we are both better off with a Hillary loss. I’ve got two reasons: $100,000 tax savings every year of Trump. And I am feeling blessed that I won’t be hearing about Hillary’s emails being investigated by the FBI everyday for the next four years. I would say I won, despite my vote for the loser Hillary.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

SIGNYM

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 7:43 PM

AFA Russia "hacking" the elections ... both Russia and the USA gather information on ALL candidates of ALL important elections. Other nations to the same as well, to the extent of their abilities and/or their ties to more capable intelligence organizations.

Now, there are a couple of important points to make

1) Nobody "hacked" anything. A hack is an exploit where a hardware of software vulnerability is taken advantage of to gain access to a system. This wasn't a hack, it was one of the oldest tricks in the book. What WAS taken advantage of was was human gullibility.

2) About whoever had access to the DNC server: Passively gathering information does NOT "influence" an election. It's only a problem if that information is released.

3) If anything did influence the election, it was the RELEASE of the emails. Julian Assange categorically states it was not Russia, but an insider. So if you want to blame anyone for rattling the election, is was this person.

4) There is no proof that it was "Russia" that accessed the server, and the FBI apparently didn't even get access to the server (What? Was the DNC busy bleach-bitting this server too?). Everyone is ASSUMING that it was Russia on the basis, mostly, of cui bono?. However, there were TWO documented unauthorized accesses and possibly three. Was Russia responsible for ALL of them? If so, that's awfully clumsy, since the latest one exposed the first. Like everyone else, I ASSUME it was Russia that accessed the server once. I find it hard to imagine that this super-dangerous cyber-enemy tripped over its own feet tho.

As far as I can tell, none of you have addressed Glenn Greewnald's and Matt Taibi's main point, which is that the deep state is busy spewing propaganda into the media FOR ITS OWN PURPOSES, and that many people bought into it, and continue to buy into it. I'm afraid that Greenwald and Taibbi - both of whom hate Trump- have failed in their purpose, since they have caused exactly zero people (here, anyway) to take a second look at their own beliefs and reactions with the new information that they may have been manipulated into it.

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND

THGRRI

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 8:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Now, there are a couple of important points to make

1) Nobody "hacked" anything. A hack is an exploit where a hardware of software vulnerability is taken advantage of to gain access to a system. This wasn't a hack, it was one of the oldest tricks in the book. What WAS taken advantage of was was human gullibility.

Hacking is to gain access to (a computer file or network) illegally or without authorization:

You'll lie about the simplest of things. There's just no limit to your and 1kiki's attempts at deflecting from the truth is there? Your above statement about hacking is, well, astounding.

____________________________________________

SIGNYM

Wednesday, January 18, 2017 5:12 PM

Dood. Son. Don't cross swords with me on computer culture; I know far too many experts (and I mean REAL experts ... people who program at the highest level and who can run rings around any "security expert" that you can cite on the internet) for you to win at this, and you'll only show yourself to be the ignoranus that you really are.

Real hackers would not refer to spearphishing as "hacking".

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND

6IXSTRINGJACK

Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
-6ixStringJack, let us find something more to agree about.

A trio of researchers takes a broad look at the evidence that FBI Director James Comey affected the election. Their conclusion:

The evidence is clear, and consistent, regarding the Comey effect. The timing of the shift both at the state and national levels lines up very neatly with the publication of the letter, as does the predominance of the story in the media coverage from the final week of the campaign. With an unusually large number of undecided voters late in the campaign, the letter hugely increased the salience of what was the defining critique of Clinton during the campaign at its most critical moment.

www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/1/11/14215930/comey-email-election-clint
on-campaign

If it weren't for Comey, Hillary Clinton would have won the popular vote by about 6 points and the Electoral College by 70 or more. And that might have turned into control of the Senate as well, though that's a little more speculative.

Three times the director of the FBI (a Republican) accused Hillary of being a criminal and three times the FBI said it did not have evidence to prove it, but it would keep trying until it did. The FBI never did that to anybody in Organized Crime, but the FBI did it in a Presidential Election.

6ixStringJack and I can agree on one thing: we are both better off with a Hillary loss. I’ve got two reasons: $100,000 tax savings every year of Trump. And I am feeling blessed that I won’t be hearing about Hillary’s emails being investigated by the FBI everyday for the next four years. I would say I won, despite my vote for the loser Hillary.

Just to clear things up Second, Comey actually did say before the General election that Hillary's server was, in fact, illegal. However, he said that in their eyes she was unaware of it being illegal and that they could not prove she had any intent to break the law, so they would not be seeking criminal charges.

That is a far cry from being proclaimed innocent. I've always heard "ignorance of the law is no excuse". There is no doubt that if you or I were guilty of the same thing we'd be locked up right now. This is another big reason that Trump got elected. People are tired of the Elites like the Clintons getting a free pass where your regular citizen never would.

You mind sharing some of that tax return? With just half of your tax savings this year I could pay all of my bills for the next 10 years. (well, maybe only 7 with inflation)

Do Right, Be Right. :)

THGRRI

Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Dood. Son. Don't cross swords with me on computer culture; I know far too many experts (and I mean REAL experts ... people who program at the highest level and who can run rings around any "security expert" that you can cite on the internet) for you to win at this, and you'll only show yourself to be the ignoranus that you really are.

Real hackers would not refer to spearphishing as "hacking".

-----------

"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND

That's because you're a Russian troll. Nonetheless, my statement about what constitutes hacking is correct. Your explanation for dismissing the hacking was down right funny.

I'll let others see for themselves what you posted about the hacking and see if your claim of be so technically advanced is accurate.

SIG's post on hacking. This wasn't a hack, it was one of the oldest tricks in the book. What WAS taken advantage of was was human gullibility.

In other SIG claims that if you are gullible, you weren't hack because it was your fault.

____________________________________________

JAYNEZTOWN

Wednesday, October 19, 2022 9:51 PM

Glenn Greenwald: No One Trying To Deescalate Nuclear War With Russia Out Of Fear Of Being Called Unpatriotic

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/10/03/glenn_greenwald_no_
one_trying_to_deescalate_nuclear_war_with_russia_out_of_fear_of_being_called_unpatriotic.html

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, November 29, 2022 9:06 PM

...Joe does not have babysitters and is in full control ...or...

Who has really been running our country?

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/11/who_has_really_been_runni
ng_our_country.html

JAYNEZTOWN

Monday, March 27, 2023 10:41 PM

Why didn't Trump 'shatter the deep state' when he was president for four years?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-didnt-trump-shatter-the
-deep-state-when-he-was-president-for-four-years

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:12 AM

Who needs an enemy when these Neo-Democrats got so unhinged and crazy?

JAYNEZTOWN

Monday, June 3, 2024 8:09 PM

The Real ‘Deep State’
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/07/wolves-of-k-stree
t-book-review-lobbying/678523/
Lobbying firms have disguised their influence so well that it’s often barely visible even to savvy Washington insiders.

State Secrecy Explains the Origins of the ‘Deep State’ Conspiracy Theory
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/state-secrecy-explains-the-
origins-of-the-deep-state-conspiracy-theory/
Lost in today’s misinformation fights is the recognition that modern conspiracy theories spring from excesses of state secrecy

THG

Monday, June 3, 2024 8:16 PM

Trump is now a convicted felon.

T

Trump’s Disastrous Press Conference After Guilty Verdict & MAGA Nuts Kiss Ass with Cringey Tributes

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, September 17, 2024 5:06 PM

JEFFREY SACHS: VICTORIA NULAND IS THE FACE OF THE DEEP STATE
https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1835852004100395104
"I think it’s obvious.
There’s one deep state party—that of Cheney, Harris, Biden, and Victoria Nuland. Nuland has been in every administration for the last 30 years, from Clinton to Bush to Obama, and now Biden.
She’s wrecked U.S. policies on Russia, NATO, and even orchestrated the coup in Ukraine in 2014, which started a war. She’s advised both Cheney and Biden.
This is the reality we’re dealing with—a colossal mess, and the big question is, are we going to find another party to challenge this?"

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, November 19, 2024 7:34 PM

Glenn Greenwald: Scarborough and Brzezinski Are The Most Humiliating And Pathetic People In Corporate Media

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/11/18/glenn_greenwald_sca
rborough_and_brzezinski_are_the_most_humiliating_and_pathetic_people_in_corporate_media.html

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, April 4, 2025 8:07 PM

New limitation on speech so

Greenwald regrets giving full support to ZionDon?

Trump pledges to deport non-citizen college students who took part in pro-Palestinian protests
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-student-visas-pro-palestinian-prot
esters-1.7445764

Private groups work to identify and report student protesters for possible deportation
https://apnews.com/article/trump-foreign-students-campus-gaza-protests
-deportation-9e2d4abc1c158454da1f68c01062c9ef

JAYNEZTOWN

Saturday, May 31, 2025 3:27 PM

Glenn Greenwald says Globalists, Communists, Jews the British Royals Forced Him To Retweet Weirdo Gay Crossdressing humiliation of himself anyone regrets reading the news it looks like porno stuff

a weirdo Lawyer sucking on a Black dudes foot?

Famous journalist Glenn Greenwald mired in sex tape scandal that he says was released by 'political enemies'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14765571/glenn-greenwald-jour
nalist-sex-tape-political-enemies.html

JAYNEZTOWN

Monday, June 23, 2025 8:15 PM

Palantir a problem, but can Glenn Greenwald be trusted

seems to be sleaze and corruption everywhere now