Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 10:01pm

Brian? wrote: »

Stone is charged with lying about the above, and charged with tampering with a witness. Not with talking to Wikileaks. You’ve actually just acknowledged he’s guilty.

I don't think he is guilty of anything. He wanted information about Hilary dealings.

It is about Wikileaks Hilary emails and what Stone knew and who he told in Trump campaign. Why else would they go after Roger stone?

Midlife · 25-01-2019 10:05pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't think he is guilty of anything. He wanted information about Hilary dealings.

It is about Wikileaks Hilary emails and what Stone knew and who he told in Trump campaign. Why else would they go after Roger stone?

Because he's guilty and they hope to turn him.

everlast75 · 25-01-2019 10:08pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You guys thought last week the buzzfeed article was the end and were jumping for joy. I warned you guys not to believe it and to wait and explained why and what happens i was correct..

Your motive was not an educational one.

It was to gloat about "fake news".

Unfortunately for you, the denial by the SCO was extremely limited in nature.

You will know that if it was all BS, then the SCO could just say so.

They didn't.

The fact that such a big deal of the limited denial was made only goes to show how desperate those who support Trump are for a win on the "fake news" narrative.

There have been dozens of legitimate scandals that are unequivocally proven to be true.

You can chose to believe them or not.

That's up to you.

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 10:09pm

It is the indictment Muller filed describing Stone role with Wikileaks.

Brian? · 25-01-2019 10:09pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't think he is guilty of anything. He wanted information about Hilary dealings.

Yes. He lied about doing it to Congress and the FBI.

It is about Wikileaks Hilary emails and what Stone knew and who he told in Trump campaign. Why else would they go after Roger stone?

They’re going after Stone because he broke the law when questioned. The are building a criminal conspiracy case against Trump too.

He was asked questions and lied. He directed a witness to lie. Both are crimes. Simple.

everlast75 · 25-01-2019 10:10pm

https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1088898952257130496?s=19

The ire is not merely directed at DJT apparently

Muahahaha · 25-01-2019 10:11pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

While end-to-end encryption is basically unbreakable but not if the service provider has the key or if someone in the conversation backs up their conversations to cloud storage.

It could well have been a back up because Whatapp asks if you want to back them up. That aside I doubt Facebook as the owners of Whatapp would want the world to know that they gave out private messages to the FBI.

It wasn't that long ago that Apple refused to give the FBI a code to break into an iPhone so they could get messages to prosecute a terrorist in California. It later emerged that a private Israeli intelligence firm had managed to crack the iPhone. Unsure if this was ever true but it wouldnt surprise me.

Is end to end encryption truly unbreakable? It sounds difficult but would imagine intelligence services would have the resources and expertise to do it?

Itssoeasy · 25-01-2019 10:11pm

everlast75 wrote: »

Your motive was not an educational one.

It was to gloat about "fake news".

Unfortunately for you, the denial by the SCO was extremely limited in nature.

You will know that if it was all BS, then the SCO could just say so.

They didn't.

The fact that such a big deal of the limited denial was made only goes to show how desperate those who support Trump are for a win on the "fake news" narrative.

There have been dozens of legitimate scandals that are unequivocally proven to be true.

You can chose to believe them or not.

That's up to you.

I agree the SCO statement about buzzfeed was the most nuanced one and only said the characterisation of who the material was obtained was not correct not the substance of the story.

Brian? · 25-01-2019 10:11pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It is the indictment Muller filed describing Stone role with Wikileaks.

What has he been charged with?

mcmoustache · 25-01-2019 10:14pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't think he is guilty of anything. He wanted information about Hilary dealings.

It is about Wikileaks Hilary emails and what Stone knew and who he told in Trump campaign. Why else would they go after Roger stone?

Do I have to explain Guccifer 2.0 to you again? I don't mind doing that but it's not worth clogging up this thread.

Also, I do accept that you are arguing in good faith. From other discussions, it's clear that you're not a troll and you aren't trying to spread disinformation. I'm pointing this out in case other people think that you are trolling.

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 10:19pm

Brian? wrote: »

What has he been charged with?

He allegedly lied to Congress and the House Intelligence Committee about Wikileaks, tampering with witnesses, and some other stuff.

Brian? · 25-01-2019 10:22pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

He allegedly lied to Congress and the House Intelligence Committee about Wikileaks, tampering with witnesses, and some other stuff.

Exactly. It’s clear he talked to Assange. Agreed? He was asked and lied.

oscarBravo · 25-01-2019 10:28pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Is end to end encryption truly unbreakable?

If it's decent quality encryption, then it can't be broken from an in-transit intercept. If you get a hold of the encryption keys, though - or if the encryption has been compromised - all bets are off.

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 10:30pm

Brian? wrote: »

Exactly. It’s clear he talked to Assange. Agreed? He was asked and lied.

Stone claims he did not directly talk to Wikileaks or Assange. He was in contact with a journalist who he knew who talked to them and that's how he got information. If he lying in time we find out.

mcmoustache · 25-01-2019 10:30pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Is end to end encryption truly unbreakable? It sounds difficult but would imagine intelligence services would have the resources and expertise to do it?

End to end encryption is unbreakable (barring future developments in quantum computing). When I say that it is unbreakable, what I mean is that someone who gets the encrypted message cannot guess the key that decrypts it in a useful timeframe such as a human life or the heat death of the universe.

The encryption algorithms that are available are basically unbreakable. On the other hand key management is not and this is where the weakness lies. Imagine if I wanted to send you a secret message. I would have to generate a key and send it to you somehow. If I send it over the internet, the isp and NSA would have a copy of it. And I'm hardly going to drive to your place with a USB stick and give you the key although this would be very secure.

If we did give/exchange keys in meatspace and transmitted messages using those keys, they would be secure. The problem is that most implementations involve key generation, key distribution and key exchange being online. And, by the way, there are secure ways to do this online too (Diffy-Hellman sp?).

But the most secure encryption in the world can be defeated by a plain text backup.

mcmoustache · 25-01-2019 10:31pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

If it's decent quality encryption, then it can't be broken from an in-transit intercept. If you get a hold of the encryption keys, though - or if the encryption has been compromised - all bets are off.

That sums up my wordy version.

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 10:46pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

Do I have to explain Guccifer 2.0 to you again? I don't mind doing that but it's not worth clogging up this thread.

Also, I do accept that you are arguing in good faith. From other discussions, it's clear that you're not a troll and you aren't trying to spread disinformation. I'm pointing this out in case other people think that you are trolling.

In my opinion, Seth Rich leaked the emails to Wikileaks and got killed over it

US intelligence believes it was a group in Russia, with links to the GRU.

Wikileaks denies the Russians leaked the emails. I trust WikiLeaks personally, the record of exposing crimes is established.

batgoat · 25-01-2019 10:48pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

In my opinion, Seth Rich leaked the emails to Wikileaks and got killed over it

US intelligence believes it was a group in Russia, with links to the GRU.

Wikileaks denies the Russians leaked the emails. I trust WikiLeaks personally, the record of exposing crimes is established.

And that is conspiracy theory with no basis and I really sympathise with his family that they have to deal with this nonsense in the wake of their family member's death. To borrow from his brother.

“Why everyone feels the need to use his death for their own motives is beyond us,” he wrote. “We simply want to find his killers and grieve. Instead, we are stuck having to constantly fight against non-facts, baseless allegations, and general stupidity to defend my brother’s name and legacy.”

He continued, “This only prevents us from moving forward in our grieving and distracts from answering the only question that matters — Who murdered my brother and my parents’ son, Seth?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks.html

everlast75 · 25-01-2019 10:57pm

SCO was telling the truth when they contradicted Buzzfeed.

SCO is charging Stone even though he did nothing wrong.

See anything wrong with that logic?

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 10:57pm

batgoat wrote: »

And that is conspiracy theory with no basis and I really sympathise with his family that they have to deal with this nonsense in the wake of their family member's death. To borrow from his brother.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks.html

The problem with that is the family hired a private investigator and he discovered Seth was in communication with Wikileaks. Wikileaks when he was murdered even offered a reward for information about the murder.

This is a fact
The family agreed and paid Rod Wheeler, a former D.C. homicide detective, to look into the July 10 murder.

"My investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks," Wheeler told Fox News. "I do believe that the answers to who murdered Seth Rich sits on his computer on a shelf at the D.C. police or FBI headquarters."

He was murdered in the time frame of when the hacking was happening in 2016.

Did the family back off when they learned this new information, its scary to think about. They may have just wanted to distance themselves from this and not get involved for obvious reasons.

batgoat · 25-01-2019 11:09pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The problem with that is the family hired a private investigator and he discovered Seth was in communication with Wikileaks. Wikileaks when he was murdered even offered a reward for information about the murder.

This is a fact
The family agreed and paid Rod Wheeler, a former D.C. homicide detective, to look into the July 10 murder.

"My investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks," Wheeler told Fox News. "I do believe that the answers to who murdered Seth Rich sits on his computer on a shelf at the D.C. police or FBI headquarters."

He was murdered in the time frame of when the hacking was happening in 2016.

Did the family back off when they learned this new information, its scary to think about. They may have just wanted to distance themselves from this and not get involved for obvious reasons.

The thing is none of this appears to have a factual basis and the aforementioned private investigator was trying to brainwash the Rich family on behalf of the administration.... So it's a bit dishonest to ignore what followed that Fox News interview and what was actually occurring, the family are suing as a result.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/03/14/fox-news-sued-by-parents-of-seth-rich-slain-dnc-staffer-for-conspiracy-theory-about-his-death/?utm_term=.c089954dec26

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 11:14pm

batgoat wrote: »

The thing is none of this appears to have a factual basis and the aforementioned private investigator was trying to brainwash the Rich family on behalf of the administration.... So it's a bit dishonest to ignore what followed that Fox News interview and what was actually occurring, the family are suing as a result.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/03/14/fox-news-sued-by-parents-of-seth-rich-slain-dnc-staffer-for-conspiracy-theory-about-his-death/?utm_term=.c089954dec26

Your link is a subscription cant read.

That not true we know the Rich had contacted Wikileaks through investigative reporter Gavin McFaiden, who worked for WikiLeaks. We know for a fact Seth was passing info to Wikileaks.

The family are obviously in distress after losing their son and likely sick to death of rumours and stories, but that doesn't change the facts.

Their son was shot and killed, nothing was taken from him, his wallet or money. Nobody has ever got caught for it.

mcmoustache · 25-01-2019 11:17pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

In my opinion, Seth Rich leaked the emails to Wikileaks and got killed over it

Roger Stone and Randy Credico pushed that theory when they knew it was bullshít. Coincidentally, Russia Today also pushed that story.

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 11:24pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

Roger Stone and Randy Credico pushed that theory when they knew it was bullshít. Coincidentally, Russia Today also pushed that story.

The theory does make sense. Wikileaks even offered a reward to find the killer. Why would they do that if he was unknown to them? Do you think the offer rewards to everyone who is murdered?

A New York judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit brought against Fox News by the parents of former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich over the network’s coverage of a conspiracy theory involving their slain son, claiming that it was not portrayed as “sufficiently outrageous,” according to the ruling.

batgoat · 25-01-2019 11:26pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Your link is a subscription cant read.

That not true we know the Rich had contacted Wikileaks through investigative reporter Gavin McFaiden, who worked for WikiLeaks. We know for a fact Seth was passing info to Wikileaks.

The family are obviously in distress after losing their son and likely sick to death of rumours and stories, but that doesn't change the facts.

Their son was shot and killed, nothing was taken from him, his wallet or money. Nobody has ever got caught for it.

Here's another source.. They definitively state, those specific quotes were entirely made up.... It also backs up that story had zero fact check hence the retraction. So you're using a fictional quote to backup your argument. Argument fails from the very start. Anyway, not gonna debate it any further as there is no basis and it's completely disrespectful towards his family.

Wheeler challenges Zimmerman over the letter in a three-way phone conversation that also included Butowsky. The Fox News reporter defends herself: "That's the email that Fox asked me to send him. They wrote it for me."

Wheeler replies: "That's not accurate, though, because much, much of the information did not come from me."

"Not about the emails. Not the part about, I mean, the connection to WikiLeaks," Zimmerman acknowledges. "But the rest of the quotes in the story did."

Butowsky weighs in: "One day you're going to win an award for having said those things you didn't say." Later, according to the recordings transcribed in the suit, Butowsky acknowledges Wheeler hadn't made any claims of personal knowledge about emails between Rich and WikiLeaks. "I know that's not true," Butowsky says. "If I'm under oath, I would say I never heard him say that."d ste[a]l emails and there was no collusion" between "Trump and the Russians."

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/01/540783715/lawsuit-alleges-fox-news-and-trump-supporter-created-fake-news-story

DrumSteve · 25-01-2019 11:33pm

Ah the ol’ Seth Rich distraction.... a classic.

Is Hannity still pushing that one?

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 11:34pm

batgoat wrote: »

Here's another source.. They definitively state, those specific quotes were entirely made up.... It also backs up that story had zero fact check hence the retraction. So you're using a fictional quote to backup your argument. Argument fails from the very start. Anyway, not gonna debate it any further as there is no basis and it's completely disrespectful towards his family.

Fox News won the lawsuit or got it dismissed. There was no evidence Wheeler was misquoted. End of day the information is solid. They could not win the court battle and evidence was offered up by Fox News.

Cheerful Spring · 25-01-2019 11:44pm

Julian Assange pretty much reveals Seth Rich was the source for the leaks in this video.

mcmoustache · 25-01-2019 11:48pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Julian Assange pretty much reveals Seth Rich was the source for the leaks in this video.

##Snip##

Don't post Memes..

Thanks

batgoat · 25-01-2019 11:49pm

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Fox News won the lawsuit or got it dismissed. There was no evidence Wheeler was misquoted. End of day the information is solid. They could not win the court battle and evidence was offered up by Fox News.

The judge concluded there was not enough detail in terms of fox collaborating against his parents. The judge specifically states that the story was baseless and sensational.

The judge wrote that Wheeler and Fox News “embarked on a collective effort to support a sensational claim regarding Seth Rich’s murder”.

He said Wheeler “cannot now seek to avoid the consequences of his own complicity and coordinated assistance in perpetuating a politically motivated story not having any basis in fact”.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/02/seth-rich-dnc-lawsuit-fox-news-dismissed

Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Comments