Republicans: continued

[Cunt]

Biden might have more of a chance if he got a big endorsement.

That Barry hasn't endorsed him is almost the opposite

[Tero]

We have only one thing I think is pretty big with Biden. It has to do with Trump: losing to Biden is like losing to Hillary.

[Cunt]

If you mean they have the same chance of beating Trump, yeah, that was my point.

I guess it is going to be Bloomburg or Steyers. Good thing they aren't corrupt billionaires or it would be just as bad as the Repugnicans

[Tero]

No I mean the little things that drive Trump nuts. Like the Romney vote. Trump never "locked up" Hillary. And here is Biden from the same administration! Biden is like the ghost of Hillary coming to get him.

[Cunt]

No I mean the little things that drive Trump nuts. Like the Romney vote.

I don't think it drove him nuts. I heard Romney's comments. He sounded sincere.

Trump never "locked up" Hillary.

Give it time.

Do you understand that the DNC server was NOT hacked, but the data transfer rates indicate that it was a leak instead?

Do you know the implications of that small fact?

And here is Biden from the same administration! Biden is like the ghost of Hillary coming to get him.

Biden is embarrassing himself. He had Iowa to himself while all the other candidates were stuck in DC. Then he took fourth (if the primaries are accepted)

How the FUCK can the republicans win the dem's primary? lol

[L'Emmerdeur]

Ah, the jolly fellow from Canada regurgitating bullshit claims from RWNJ sources. No fruitloop conspiracy theory championed by the gullible that you won't glom onto. Taking right up where you left off.

The claims are based on metadata from the files, which were leaked by their purported hacker, Guccifer 2.0, during the 2016 election season.

Metadata is information recorded in a file for archiving purposes and is not displayed when a file is open. It can include the last date a file is modified and note what software and devices were involved in creating the file, among other information.

When files are copied to a new device, the metadata can record the time each file finishes being duplicated as the time it was “last modified.”

A blogger named “The Forensicator” analyzed the "last modified" times in one set of documents released by Guccifer 2.0. Based on the size of the documents and the times they were downloaded, Forensicator calculated that a hacker was able to copy the files at a speed of more than 20 megabytes per second.

That is faster than consumer internet services in the United States can upload documents.

As a result, Forensicator concluded that the documents could not have been copied over the internet. Instead, someone with physical access to the network must have copied them in person to a USB drive, the blogger concluded.

“This theory assumes that the hacker downloaded the files to a computer and then leaked it from that computer,” said Rich Barger, director of security research at Splunk.

But, said Barger and other experts, that overlooks the possibility the files were copied multiple times before being released, something that may be more probable than not in a bureaucracy like Russian intelligence.

“A hacker might have downloaded it to one computer, then shared it by USB to an air gapped [off the internet] network for translation, then copied by a different person for analysis, then brought a new USB to an entirely different air gapped computer to determine a strategy all before it was packaged for Guccifer 2.0 to leak,” said Barger.

Every time the files were copied, depending on the method they were transmitted, there would be a new chance for the metadata to be changed.

Hultquist said the date that Forensicator believes that the files were downloaded, based on the metadata, is almost definitely not the date the files were removed from the DNC.

That date, July 5, 2016, was far later than the April dates when the DNC hackers registered “electionleaks.com” and “DCLeaks.com.” Hulquist noted that the DNC hackers likely had stolen files by the time they began determining their strategy to post them.

The July date is also months after the DNC brought in FireEye competitor CrowdStrike to remove the hackers from their network and well after Crowdstrike first attributed the attack to Russia.

With increased scrutiny on the network, it would be a high-risk way to remove files. And if an insider removed files from the DNC on July 5, it could just as likely be a second, unrelated attack to the Russian one.

Even if there were no other scenarios that would create the same metadata, experts note that metadata is among the easiest pieces of forensic evidence to falsify. It would be far more difficult to fabricate other evidence pointing to Russia, including the malware only known to be used by the suspected Russian hackers, and internet and email addresses seen in previous attacks by that group.

Forensicator’s claim that 20 to 25 megabyte per second downloads would be impossible over the internet also raised eyebrows.

John Bambenek, threat systems manager at the security firm Fidelis, noted that while home internet, where uploads are much slower than downloads, would not allow that speed, corporate and cloud networks could do so.

The DNC would not provide details about its upload speeds in July of 2016.

Proponents of the Forensicator theory have accused CrowdStrike co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch of being biased against Russia, negating his firm’s analysis.

[source]

[Tero]

No I mean the little things that drive Trump nuts. Like the Romney vote.

I don't think it drove him nuts. I heard Romney's comments. He sounded sincere.

Trump never "locked up" Hillary.

Give it time.

Do you understand that the DNC server was NOT hacked, but the data transfer rates indicate that it was a leak instead?

Do you know the implications of that small fact?

And here is Biden from the same administration! Biden is like the ghost of Hillary coming to get him.

Biden is embarrassing himself. He had Iowa to himself while all the other candidates were stuck in DC. Then he took fourth (if the primaries are accepted)

How the FUCK can the republicans win the dem's primary? lol

None of that has any meaning. Not Hunter Biden or any other conspiracy you are reading. Hillary will not be locked up. Trump will spend his post presidency years losing in court. For all his crooked businesses.

[Cunt]

Ah, the jolly fellow from Canada regurgitating bullshit claims from RWNJ sources.

Namecalling and in-group acronyms. That's CLASSY AS FUCK. You must be a Democrat fan! Thanks for sticking your flag in the mud so clearly.

I'm not reading more 'Russian Collusion' conspiracy theories from desperate accusers.

If you could get an investigator to REALLY look into Russian Collusion, then we would ALL see the evidence.

Let's call him Mueller, and wait with baited breath while he digs into EVERYTHING!!!

None of that has any meaning. Not Hunter Biden or any other conspiracy you are reading. Hillary will not be locked up. Trump will spend his post presidency years losing in court. For all his crooked businesses.

So we have to wait for 2025 until he stops winning? Great, that should make this a fun thread to read, if we can keep Democrats contributing

[L'Emmerdeur]

Ah, the jolly fellow from Canada regurgitating bullshit claims from RWNJ sources.

Namecalling and in-group acronyms. That's CLASSY AS FUCK. You must be a Democrat fan! Thanks for sticking your flag in the mud so clearly.

In what way does 'the jolly fellow from Canada' qualify as name-calling? It must be 'CLASSY AS FUCK' to misrepresent as you've just done, because that's one of your favourite ruses. I'll spell the acronym out for you: Right Wing Nut Job, as in the inhabitants of various online cesspits from which you apparently acquire so much of your material.

I'm not reading more 'Russian Collusion' conspiracy theories from desperate accusers.

If you could get an investigator to REALLY look into Russian Collusion, then we would ALL see the evidence.

Let's call him Mueller, and wait with baited breath while he digs into EVERYTHING!!!

I'll break it to you as gently as possible: Mueller's investigation confirmed that the hack of the DNC was carried out by Russian intelligence agencies. The right wing nut job rubbish about how it was a leak!! has been thoroughly discredited and debunked. Your refusal to read about it isn't going to change the facts.

[Cunt]

I'll break it to you as gently as possible: Mueller's investigation confirmed that the hack of the DNC was carried out by Russian intelligence agencies. The right wing nut job rubbish about how it was a leak!! has been thoroughly discredited and debunked. Your refusal to read about it isn't going to change the facts.

Saying that I'm 'regurgitating talking points' is no more helpful than pointing out that you are 'regurgitating talking points'. It seems a personal attack, rather than dealing with the evidence. I'll accept what Mueller presented over you and your 'left-wing sources'. He presented nothing of consequence.

Except, of course, how these sham investigations started. Sure be a shame if that led to impeaching some dems lol

Your 'Russia' conspiracy theory had it's investigation. It didn't seem to amount to anything...maybe Mueller just hid the real evidence. The Dem media companies pushed it as hard as anything can be pushed - and it failed hilariously.

Why did Schiff hide the real evidence he claimed to have against the Republicans about it? Liar? Idiot? Working for the Republicans? Some other explanation?

Just count the attendance at the Trump rallies compared to Dem events, and maybe you'll see how clear it is to most people who aren't deluded.

I wish there were decent Democrats instead of the current TDS shit-show.

[Tero]

Trump rallies are free stand up president events now. Last time he tours on our dime. Last time they get to see the her...conman.

[L'Emmerdeur]

I'll break it to you as gently as possible: Mueller's investigation confirmed that the hack of the DNC was carried out by Russian intelligence agencies. The right wing nut job rubbish about how it was a leak!! has been thoroughly discredited and debunked. Your refusal to read about it isn't going to change the facts.

Saying that I'm 'regurgitating talking points' is no more helpful than pointing out that you are 'regurgitating talking points'. It seems a personal attack, rather than dealing with the evidence. I'll accept what Mueller presented over you and your 'left-wing sources'. He presented nothing of consequence.

Except, of course, how these sham investigations started. Sure be a shame if that led to impeaching some dems lol

Your 'Russia' conspiracy theory had it's investigation. It didn't seem to amount to anything...maybe Mueller just hid the real evidence. The Dem media companies pushed it as hard as anything can be pushed - and it failed hilariously.

Why did Schiff hide the real evidence he claimed to have against the Republicans about it? Liar? Idiot? Working for the Republicans? Some other explanation?

Just count the attendance at the Trump rallies compared to Dem events, and maybe you'll see how clear it is to most people who aren't deluded.

I wish there were decent Democrats instead of the current TDS shit-show.

I said that you are regurgitating bullshit claims because that's what you're doing. It's a factual statement, which I supported with evidence. The Hill is by no means a left wing source. In fact it's considered a right-centrist outlet.

Perhaps the delusional fringe conspiracy bubble has failed to keep you up to date in regards to the findings of the Mueller investigation. I suppose you'll call Tech Crunch a left-wing source as if that were some sort of smear, you being such a staunch leftist and all, and refuse to read what it has to say as well.

'Mueller report sheds new light on how the Russians hacked the DNC and the Clinton campaign'

[Cunt]

I don't understand much of that first part. They aren't 'free', in the sense that people have lined up and 'spent' time...

Conman is funny. Not 'James Woods' funny, but funny.

As to the 'Russua Collusion' conspiritors, I think it's probably best not to feed the trolls. Mueller shot his shot. It's shot. It was VERY impressive.

I wonder what Durham will find...and what are those (nearly 100,000) HUGE number of sealed indictments suggesting? That sounds more interesting to me. I mean, with THAT many sealed, there MUST be some devilish Republicans going down...right?

[Cunt]

Oh, and James IS funnier than your 'Conman' jab...this was his first tweet after getting out of twitter jail...

I was on vacation awhile, avoiding the news. How’d the #Mueller thing work out? The #impeachment scam? Who won the #Iowa caucuses? Is #MichaelAvenatti still a contender for the Democratic nomination for President? How’s #JeffreyEpstein doing?

[pErvinalia]

I'll break it to you as gently as possible: Mueller's investigation confirmed that the hack of the DNC was carried out by Russian intelligence agencies. The right wing nut job rubbish about how it was a leak!! has been thoroughly discredited and debunked. Your refusal to read about it isn't going to change the facts.

Saying that I'm 'regurgitating talking points' is no more helpful than pointing out that you are 'regurgitating talking points'. It seems a personal attack, rather than dealing with the evidence. I'll accept what Mueller presented over you and your 'left-wing sources'. He presented nothing of consequence.

Except, of course, how these sham investigations started. Sure be a shame if that led to impeaching some dems lol

Your 'Russia' conspiracy theory had it's investigation. It didn't seem to amount to anything...maybe Mueller just hid the real evidence. The Dem media companies pushed it as hard as anything can be pushed - and it failed hilariously.

Why did Schiff hide the real evidence he claimed to have against the Republicans about it? Liar? Idiot? Working for the Republicans? Some other explanation?

Just count the attendance at the Trump rallies compared to Dem events, and maybe you'll see how clear it is to most people who aren't deluded.

I wish there were decent Democrats instead of the current TDS shit-show.

Oh look, Cunt changing the subject to avoid admitting he's peddling a lame conspiracy theory.