Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trey Gowdy damages Mueller's investigation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    THE Mueller Star Chamber....
    Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
    Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

    Comment


    • #62
      Mueller ain't got Zilch and won't have Zilch on Trump, this year, next year or the year after that, but the News Media will have something to talk about, ( making them Money), and on it goes, making me sick!
      Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Massena View Post

        Absolutely. Both Trump and the Republicans are scared to death of Mueller and what he is finding out.

        That nothing-burger has been cooking for about a year now, but where's the beef?


        Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post

        His admission is akin to a cook admitting that he urinated into a vat of soup stock; no matter how much is added to it, once told no one wants a bowl.
        Maybe so, but the Dems are sure keen on drinking from the Kool-aid bucket.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
          Yea Really, I don't care what his Son did then or now, I get that they guy is Bombastic, but I get Sarcasm when I hear it or see it, but some people don't, they take everything verbatim and it's sad, they are just angry people and I for one refuse to live my life that way
          Apparently the Russians did not get that this was sarcasm.
          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Cheetah772 View Post

            One more thing, it is worth pointing out that neither FBI nor Mueller's team had a chance to examine the DNC's server forensically. So they cannot say with certainty that DNC's server was hacked from outside. All they have is a third party's forensic analysis. Although some in US intelligence community say Crowdstrike (the company hired to do an analysis of DNC's server) is pretty good and there's no reason not to trust their conclusions, it is pretty instructive to see DNC blocking FBI from accessing the server.
            All very well for a declaration, but would a criminal court accept the FBI outsourcing it's investigation to some DNC lackeys?

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Anthrax View Post

              No, it's do to favoritism.
              If you know anything about computer hacking, then you know that no computer is safe unless it is not connected to any outside ports...at all. And even then, its still not safe.
              Then you know nothing about computers. While any computer hooked up to an accessible network is theoretically hackable, some are more secure than others. Hackers usually go for the low hanging fruit. That is, they hack the easiest to hack computers. That'd be ones that have poor SA's (like the Awan family), a lackadaisical attitude towards security and passwords, and ones that are run out of somebody's basement by a mediocre service.

              Government run systems (seeing as how I was an SA on one for the DoJ for several years) require frequent password changes across the board, have serious password requirements (inclusion of caps and small letters, numbers, special characters, minimum length limits, non-repeatability, etc.). If the Democrats were letting idiots like the Awans run their computer, and Hillary's password never changed because it was inconvenient for her and she got to make the rules on her server, then they got what they deserved.

              So, the Russians might well have tried to hack Republican computer systems but found them tougher than the Democrats, so they focused on the ones they could get into easily.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                Then you know nothing about computers. While any computer hooked up to an accessible network is theoretically hackable, some are more secure than others. Hackers usually go for the low hanging fruit. That is, they hack the easiest to hack computers. That'd be ones that have poor SA's (like the Awan family), a lackadaisical attitude towards security and passwords, and ones that are run out of somebody's basement by a mediocre service.

                Government run systems (seeing as how I was an SA on one for the DoJ for several years) require frequent password changes across the board, have serious password requirements (inclusion of caps and small letters, numbers, special characters, minimum length limits, non-repeatability, etc.). If the Democrats were letting idiots like the Awans run their computer, and Hillary's password never changed because it was inconvenient for her and she got to make the rules on her server, then they got what they deserved.

                So, the Russians might well have tried to hack Republican computer systems but found them tougher than the Democrats, so they focused on the ones they could get into easily.
                Bold mine

                Apparently you are not aware of the intelligence assessment which told us that the Russians used more resources to target the democrats and showed a desire to help Trump win the elections. So you make things up when you explain the events by arguing that republicans had better security systems.
                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by pamak View Post

                  Bold mine

                  Apparently you are not aware of the intelligence assessment which told us that the Russians used more resources to target the democrats and showed a desire to help Trump win the elections. So you make things up when you explain the events by arguing that republicans had better security systems.
                  Yea.... Sure... This is the same bunch run by guys like CIA director Brennan who hates Trump... If they knew about the attempts why not stop them or warn the parties? Oh, that's right, they did warn them... But the Democrats ignored that and did nothing. Then when they were hacked, they refused to let any sort of law enforcement or computer security professionals look at their servers, Hillary's included.

                  The problem with your argument is that the Democrats got hacked repeatedly. Even after the first time, they got hit again. Hillary's server is something unique to her. The Republicans didn't have anyone so criminal in their ranks that they'd try to brazenly run their own computer network outside the government. It seems to me that the reason is the Democrats were far poorer at computer security than the Republicans.

                  So, it is you that's making up a fantasy scenario. Ever consider a job at CNN? You'd fit right in over there!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Trump called it in Jan of 2017...


                    "As far as hacking, I think it was Russia," he said at a Jan. 11 press conference from Trump Tower in New York
                    "Stand for the flag ~ Kneel for the fallen"

                    "A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer." ~ Bruce Lee

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by pamak View Post

                      Bold mine

                      Apparently you are not aware of the intelligence assessment which told us that the Russians used more resources to target the democrats and showed a desire to help Trump win the elections. So you make things up when you explain the events by arguing that republicans had better security systems.
                      How did they show this exactly? Did they interview Putin?

                      It's also very plausible that they wanted to trash Hillary, based on her/Obama's prior efforts to interfere in Russia's interests, that they just didn't like her.

                      Also, given that it was almost a forgone conclusion that Hillary would win, they simply wanted to damage her reputation to make her less effective in the White House.


                      As for making things up, the RNC wasn't stupid enough to neglect its computer security, while the DNC was

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Freebird View Post
                        How did they show this exactly? Did they interview Putin?

                        It's also very plausible that they wanted to trash Hillary, based on her/Obama's prior efforts to interfere in Russia's interests, that they just didn't like her.

                        Also, given that it was almost a forgone conclusion that Hillary would win, they simply wanted to damage her reputation to make her less effective in the White House.


                        As for making things up, the RNC wasn't stupid enough to neglect its computer security, while the DNC was
                        Bold mine:

                        read their reports and testimonies...


                        They explain there how they came to such assessments.
                        The Senate Committee also came to the same conclusions.
                        I am not going to list everything from memory, but I do recall that among other things they noticed that the Russians were leaking only information that was damaging Clinton.
                        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                          Yea.... Sure... This is the same bunch run by guys like CIA director Brennan who hates Trump... If they knew about the attempts why not stop them or warn the parties? Oh, that's right, they did warn them... But the Democrats ignored that and did nothing. Then when they were hacked, they refused to let any sort of law enforcement or computer security professionals look at their servers, Hillary's included.

                          The problem with your argument is that the Democrats got hacked repeatedly. Even after the first time, they got hit again. Hillary's server is something unique to her. The Republicans didn't have anyone so criminal in their ranks that they'd try to brazenly run their own computer network outside the government. It seems to me that the reason is the Democrats were far poorer at computer security than the Republicans.

                          So, it is you that's making up a fantasy scenario. Ever consider a job at CNN? You'd fit right in over there!
                          The leadership in all agencies has changed and the assessments remain the same. It is not about hating Trump! It is about making rational intelligence assessments. And sorry, but as I said in the previous posts, Russians did have damaging information about Trump. Do you really believe that they could not leak information about the Trump Tower meeting? They did not release such damaging information because they wanted to help Trump, not because they could not.
                          My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
                            Mueller ain't got Zilch and won't have Zilch on Trump, this year, next year or the year after that, but the News Media will have something to talk about, ( making them Money), and on it goes, making me sick!
                            Not to mention Mueller's budget.

                            This farce has to play out, but hopefully it will deter other nonsensical undertakings.

                            And perhaps for Congress to take a hard look at the Famous But Incompetent with an eye to breaking up the organization.
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Are you just jealous of the FBI perhaps because you couldn't qualify for it?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Trump has spent more money on his golfing trips and to Mara-Lago on the government dime than Mueller has had to use for the investigation he was appointed to lead.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X