Slashdot Mirror


4Chan Hackers Claim To Have Remotely Wiped John Podesta's iPhone and iPad (gizmodo.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via Gizmodo: For the past several days, WikiLeaks has been publishing thousands of emails belonging to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta -- and the leaks are starting to cause some serious damage. Gizmodo reports: "Many of the leaked emails contained contact info, cell phone numbers, and account data, none of which was redacted by Wikileaks before being posted. With this information accessible to anyone with the time and energy to read through it all, users on 4chan's /pol/ (politically incorrect) board were able to gain access to Podesta's Twitter account, tweeting a message in support of Trump. Imageboard posters also stumbled on an email containing Podesta's Apple ID -- and appear to have exploited it. 'iPad/iPhone info and data wiped out,' a post on Endchan claimed, show screenshots of what seems to be the hacker gaining access to Find My iPhone using Podesta's credentials. If Podesta's Apple ID was compromised, it stands to reason that his iCloud account was similarly vulnerable. And sure enough, Redditor's on r/The_Donald claim Podesta's iCloud data was downloaded. A hacker known as CyberZeist also appears to have uncovered the passwords to dozens of senators' email addresses, as well as social security numbers and credit card info for many Democrats including Vice President Joe Biden, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and acting Chair of the DNC Donna Brazile. The information was posted to pastebin.

269 comments

  1. personally, I think infosec jackass said it best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    https://twitter.com/infosec_jackass/status/786357961794785280

  2. More evidence... by 14erCleaner · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apparently Podesta's password is "password". That's why "the Russians" have all his email, you know.

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
    1. Re:More evidence... by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Apparently Podesta's password is "password". That's why "the Russians" have all his email, you know.

      Nyet!!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly enough, "password" is also the password for the anonymous coward account, which I have just compromised

    3. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ha ha. I just changed it. You're locked out now. Loser!

    4. Re:More evidence... by elbiatcho1 · · Score: 1

      It wasn't "password", but was almost as simple... "runner4567" or something like that.

    5. Re:More evidence... by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      Apparently Podesta's password is "password". That's why "the Russians" have all his email, you know.

      no his password is "((((((password))))))" surely :P

    6. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to 4chan the password was podesta123.

    7. Re:More evidence... by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      He likely uses AOL like the rest of the government buffoons.

    8. Re:More evidence... by reboot246 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hillary's password is "pleasehackme".

    9. Re:More evidence... by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 2

      Bill uses two.

      pleasef**kme and slickwillie

    10. Re:More evidence... by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 1

      Podesta is a lisp programmer?

    11. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The ((())) tag is used by alt-righters to signify somebody they're supposed to hate.

    12. Re:More evidence... by bytesex · · Score: 1

      Really. Wow. You learn something new every day.

      --
      Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    13. Re:More evidence... by Pax681 · · Score: 2

      The ((())) tag is used by alt-righters to signify somebody they're supposed to hate.

      erm.. the ((())) is used to infer an SJW type echo chamber... btw i am not an Alt-righter , I just know a few of them.

    14. Re:More evidence... by DirkDaring · · Score: 2

      She changed it. It's now 'withacloth?'

    15. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually it's Runner4567
      https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6589#efmABQAB7

    16. Re: More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Password1, wasn't much better btw, I've changed it back to password.

    17. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the (((alt-right))) doesn't exist! It's imaginary!

    18. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK, that's not quite right. It comes from an ominous echo noise used on an alt-right podcast when Jewish names were spoken (i.e., oh those scary Jews! Their endless power and control echoes through the ages, etc etc... wish my Jewish daddy were hooked into that cabal...). When written, they use the nested parentheses as a visual version of that "echo" effect. So it's not general to SJW, it's specific to Jews; though now it may have become more general.

    19. Re:More evidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't, you fucking tool. The ((())) is used to signal parasites; the sworn enemy of white people: the Jew.

  3. And remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make sure your password is unbreakable, like 12345

    1. Re:And remember kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that using a password someone left in a publicly available document is not hacking. Although using someone's keys hanging on the door is still breaking and entering.

    2. Re:And remember kids by magarity · · Score: 1

      That's why mine is 123456.

    3. Re:And remember kids by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      So in other words, both acts are unimpressive and require no technical skill, but also both are illegal.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:And remember kids by swalve · · Score: 1

      Neither does hitting someone in the head with a mallet.

    5. Re:And remember kids by sittingnut · · Score: 2

      Make sure your password is unbreakable, like 12345

      obligatory spaceballs clip.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    6. Re: And remember kids by eledill · · Score: 1

      That's the combination to my luggage!

  4. russians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those damm russians

    1. Re:russians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those damm russians

      Are you implying it was not the Russians? 4chan is directly tied to Putin.

      -Hillary/Kaine 2016

    2. Re:russians by Hartree · · Score: 1

      Isn't the link through some guy named Goldstein, and dates back to 1984?

  5. Just stop it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    LEAVE THE DNC ALONE!

    1. Re:Just stop it by NotAPK · · Score: 2

      Why?

      Genuinely curious.

      Will their task somehow become easier if they "get the job" and win office? If they can't even handle *running* for office what makes you think they can handle the actual job?

    2. Re:Just stop it by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1
      --
      Time to offend someone
    3. Re:Just stop it by NotAPK · · Score: 1

      He he, thanks, woosh indeed! :)

  6. How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by FireballX301 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm surprised John Podesta hasn't been given a security audit by the campaign. Audit as in, replaced phone/email/computers with securely vetted stuff + had a security contractor audit and harden his accounts with better passwords/2factor/cleaning out cross referenced credentials.

    1. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by DaHat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Doubly so when iCloud password he was using was sent to him via email by one of his staffers... an email that was part of the Wikileaks dump: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

      Audit or not, if you have reason to believe someone has access to your stuff, best to change everything you can that might be referenced in that stuff (from a more secure device).

    2. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by ganjadude · · Score: 0

      maybe its his personal accts that got compromised. I would hope his work stuff is kept separate (then again, this is the hillary campaign)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's basically a Cxx equivalent. Have you ever tried to get a CEO to stop doing something insecure or stupid online?
      Seriously, I'd've just quit the IT department the second this was discovered. There's no way any low-level worker is going to avoid being reamed over this, even though it is entirely his own fault.

    4. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you read? Wikileaks fed this guy to the sharks. ALL of his stuff was pwned

    5. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by peragrin · · Score: 2

      Given that the CIA director had an AOL account, and the average politicians is 60 years old and can barely use email let alone understand it. I just assume all politicians are idiots when it comes to tech in all forms.

      I am Trying to tech a 63 year old now that he doesn't need to to print the PDF he received in his email, just so he can scan it to the file server. But he isn't happy without touching paper. And he earns twice what I do. Sure he knows a lot and has tons of practical experience. But damn getting him used to on a computer is a pain in the arse.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    6. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by fizzer06 · · Score: 1

      I'm the same age and discovered a few years ago that i sometimes misread text displayed on my monitor. More so than a printed document.

    7. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm surprised John Podesta hasn't been given a security audit by the campaign. Audit as in, replaced phone/email/computers with securely vetted stuff + had a security contractor audit and harden his accounts with better passwords/2factor/cleaning out cross referenced credentials.

      These are people who can't be bothered with security when they're the Secretary of State for the USA - how much less do you think they'd care about the data for a political campaign?

    8. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Stephenmg · · Score: 2

      I just assume all politicians are idiots.

      You didn't need any more than that.

    9. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by TimMD909 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Standards and practices, especially with email, were never really the Clinton way of doing things. This fans the flames on the email fiasco.

    10. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by swb · · Score: 1

      My wife is measurably responsible for deforestation. She prints everything. She will literally print an email that has us both in the To: box to show it to me.

      More annoyingly, she reloads the paper try to print the second side of paper so when I actually need to purposefully print something that has to be on paper, I will have to print it twice to get it on paper that doesn't have some email on the other side.

    11. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      I'm in my mid 60's. And I know one hell of a lot more infosec than these clowns. Really, it's not hard. What is even easier is to hire some young'in or even a well known security firm and have them create a security structure for everyone. You can spend ten million dollars on a friggin commercial, you can spend a couple of million on security.

      Maybe even get a Blackberry. We didn't have these problems when BB's were all the rage, did we?

      It's all Apple's fault.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    12. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      But part of the trouble is that just because someone advertises himself as knowledgeable doesn't mean he *is*. And if you don't know an area it's quite easy to get given a snow job.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    13. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      But he isn't happy without touching paper.

      I get invoices on my personal domain by email in .pdf format. Every one of them instructs me to print out a copy for my records. I'm sure that most people do exactly that because they can't get their heads around the idea that keeping a copy of the file is just as good and takes up much less physical space.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    14. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I once worked at a defense contractor. "Company confidential" data was given more protection than official US govt. "Secret" data. So it wouldn't surprise me if the political campaign had better protection. If it doesn't, it means that they really just don't know what they're doing, and the defense of incompetence should be believed.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    15. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Megane · · Score: 2

      Wow. That was only slightly better than the old joke password of "hunter2".

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    16. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Deforestation happens mostly to graze cattle or grow other crops. Paper is mostly made from wood grown with sustainable forestry practices.

      Think of it this way: trees consume carbon dioxide. Anything that encourages the growth of trees on 'managed land' (i.e. forestry for pulpwood) is good for the environment. Or at least neutral.

    17. Re: How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well yeah I'm 56 and the solution is a better screen. This is why older fogeys prefer Macs with retina screens and really large LCDs next to it.

    18. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      In politics, you have to put in all the effort _before_ you get the job.

    19. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, it gets a lot worse. Over here in Denmark, our politicians made a law saying that all communications with the state and local municipalities had to be done digitally. A reporter found out that the first thing that happened after you sent a digital message[1] to them, was that a secretary printed the message out, sorted the messages according to destinations, after which the internal mailman would pick them up and drive them to the departments they were meant for.

      A few months after that was revealed, they announced that they had now solved the problem. They had hired an external company to scan in those digital messages.

      [1] Not e-mail, they invented their own Facebook-like system, where you have to go to their servers and log in manually to see if there is anything important for you, rather than getting it in your email program.

    20. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not a scanner, though.

    21. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My wife is measurably responsible for deforestation.

      This is slashdot. Deforestation is not a thing.

    22. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by OolimPhon · · Score: 1

      I get invoices on my personal domain by email in .pdf format. Every one of them instructs me to print out a copy for my records. I'm sure that most people do exactly that because they can't get their heads around the idea that keeping a copy of the file is just as good and takes up much less physical space.

      That works right up until the moment that your backing storage suffers a head crash.

      Good luck showing those invoices to the taxman six months down the line.

      If it is important, print it out. If it isn't, don't. Important here implies "These documents hold tax information or other details I am legally obliged to retain."

    23. Re: How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, now. I'm 53 and understand exactly how email works.

    24. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they can't get their heads around the idea that keeping a copy of the file is just as good

      Until a power surge fries their computer or their hard drive just outright fails due to age. They have a hard enough time with these things WITHOUT them failing, so it probably is for the best if they do actually print things out and put them in a filing cabinet.

    25. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      If it is a backup then you have at least a second copy. If it is an important document keep multiple copies. USB flash drive are cheap and there are good options for encryption available. So the solution is to just backup the stuff you don't want to loose and if bringing someplace else where others would have access just encrypt it. I have copies of my important data in several places on USB drive, one in my desk at home, one in my pocket, one in the fire chest at home, one in my desk at work. All of the data is encrypted with a strong password.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    26. Re:How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      The tax man asks me to submit things electronically. Why would I print out a PDF then photograph it and send the photograph instead of just retaining the PDF?

    27. Re: How long has Podesta's email been compromised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why more people don't get this.

  7. Re:personall I think @infosecjackass said it best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, we already saw your attempt to get your new twitter handle some followers... good luck with that.

  8. Re:personally, I think infosec jackass said it bes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes... quite the rapier wit that InfoSec_jackass has. How does he come up with his material? Bravo, sir.... bravo!

  9. Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

    In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

    Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That does not excuse the bullshit that is in the Wikileaks emails. Many of us on the left where not planning on to vote for that warmonger in the first place but at leaks at the convention quite literally nuked any chance of support by many of us progressives. They made their bed, they can lay in it.

    2. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by DaHat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No doubt Trump supporters are chuckling at your realization of this... the same thing Republicans have known for ages about most of the media.

      Or are we to believe it was pure coincidence that an 11 year old Trump tape came out just 48 hours before the debate, and that just days later, several publications had interviews with some of the victims?

      It will be interesting to see/hear what other bombshells both sides have been sitting on for all of this time.

    3. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

      Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

      Exactly. I want to know what sort of shady stuff was secretly going on when Trump was Secretary of State. I would also like to know what was in those speeches he gave to Goldman Sachs.

    4. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      WikiLeaks is just the messenger.

      If you manage to get stuff on Trump ir the RNC, they will post it too.

    5. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by tomhath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The New York Times will post anything that makes a Republican look bad. Wikileaks handles the stuff NYT doesn't publish about Democrats.

    6. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests

      That one candidate is doing enough leaking from his own mouth for it not to matter?

    7. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could also suggest that the GOP's op-sec is way ahead of the DNC's.

      Given the bozos in the latter, I'm not sure I'd want any of them anywhere near this country's national security.

    8. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe this will encourage the media to start doing journalism again and we won't need WikiLeaks anymore.

    9. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well,... If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear

      True story...

    10. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Doesn't matter who it is, failure to redact passwords, phone numbers, etc, is just wrong. I've defended them against false accusations of "sloppy redacting" in the past, now that they're not even trying, they have lost my support.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    11. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by anarkhos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or maybe it's one-sided because one of the candidates is a crook

      --
      >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
      >life
    12. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everybody has an agenda.

    13. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the same thing Republicans have known for ages about most of the media." Like when Bush was using the embedded reporting in Iraq... Moron.

    14. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by anarkhos · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like they will ever be anything other than an establishment megaphone. That's the only reason they even exist.

      speaking of one-sided....

      --
      >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
      >life
    15. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's outrageous that Wikileaks hasn't released the thousands of emails they have collected from Trump's time in the government.

    16. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Zak3056 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      Welcome to the real world. Wikileaks has ALWAYS had an agenda, but that was fine for some people when Assange was targeting those they disagreed with. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's suddenly a problem.

      In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

      You're kidding, right? If you're leaking data, you should redact it before you give it to someone else to do with whatever they please, because who is to say that the non-redacted data won't accidentally leak, much less purposefully?

      Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

      See point one above. There are plenty on the right these days cheering them on, because many of those people are hypocrites, too.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    17. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Did you feel that way when Wikileaks was putting out U.S. military secrets, but not the military secrets of Al Qaeda, or China?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    18. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      If only Wikileaks had something on Trump so we could find out what he really thinks about women.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    19. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or are we to believe it was pure coincidence that an 11 year old Trump tape came out just 48 hours before the debate, and that just days later, several publications had interviews with some of the victims?

      I'm not a Trump supporter, but that was my first thought. I'm sure this was held for weeks or months. I'm sure we'll get another bombshell around the time early voting starts and another just before election day.

    20. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It only appears one-sided because the media appears quite willing to publish any dirt they can find Trump. We don't need to go to Wikileaks for that.

      We also don't need any single media source to be impartial. We need multiple partial media sources to keep each other on their toes.

    21. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We know it was held. The tape was from an NBC show. How did NBC get scooped if it was from their own show?

      Answer: they held the tape back and were planning on releasing it closer to the election. When the Wikileaks leak happened, "someone" leaked the tape to the Washington Post, which published immediately.

      So, yes, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the "p***y" tape was released to cover up the Wikileaks leaks.

      I still find it weird how a guy saying "pussy" in private is worse than a literal rapist who raped multiple women, but I'm not a Democrat, so what do I know about faux outrage.

    22. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by swb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if Wikileaks had a bias, what's wrong with leaking the info of careerist establishment politicians?

      Whatever Hillary is in relation to Trump, in absolute terms she's still a bought and paid for member of the establishment.

    23. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly - HRC and friends deserve all the hassle and bullshit that the underacted docs cause them

    24. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is the proof he raped several woman?

      There are woman stepping up saying trump assaulted them. 7 of them so far.

      Due process it's called. Learn it. Trump may have accusers, just like Bill does. Both have not been found guilty of any crimes.

    25. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing of value was lost.

    26. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Early voting has already started. There's less than a month left until the US is likely to vote for a candidate that's going to start WWIII with the Russians using Wikileaks as an excuse. They simply didn't have time to do it properly. Getting the information out there in time for it to be useful trumps all other concerns.

    27. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by interkin3tic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you read the e-mails as proof it was rigged, then you read what you wanted to read and would have believed anyway. Fivethirtyeight demonstrated that the convention was not rigged.

      You already knew that the DNC liked team-player, loyal soldier Hillary rather than independent, more-interested-in-protesting-than-governing Sanders. The e-mails conclusively proved only that. They did not show that sanders was cheated.

    28. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't need proof that Bill Clinton is a rapist. At least, according to Hillary Clinton. She said, flat out, that "victims should be believed." So I'm holding her to that, and believing her husband's victims.

      Trump has never said anything so stupid, and since the allegations are only coming out now, it's fairly easy to assume they're fake.

    29. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by nrjyzerbuny · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The word 'pussy' isn't the problem. The problem is the word 'grab'.

    30. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "just days later, several publications had interviews with some of the victims?"

      In other sinister developments, just days after 9/11 many news publications had pictures of the event!

      The only shocking part of this development is that, apparently, there exist news organizations that still have some kind of rudimentary idea of how to do their fucking job.

    31. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by rainer_d · · Score: 1

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      I think that was the case from the beginning.
      Are you coming to this realization just now?

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    32. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you read the e-mails as proof it was rigged, then you read what you wanted to read and would have believed anyway

      Perhaps not the convention. In California, the night before the primary election, there was an announcement on the news that Clinton had won. Guess what, turnout of Democratic electors was lower than expected. And the claim that Clinton had already won: false. Was that false claim an accident? I don't think so.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    33. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "just days later, several publications had interviews with some of the victims"

      did you read any of the interviews with the victims?

      some of them said that, while they had told the story to multiple friends and family years ago, they decided to come forward BECAUSE of the tape.

      so the timing is not a coincidence, nor is it a conspiracy. think about all of the Cosby accusers coming to light now....as a case like his builds momentum against him, more and more women feel comfortable (=less afraid) coming forward.

      i predict we're about to hear about more and more Trump instances like this.

    34. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by DogDude · · Score: 0

      Hey dipshit, you'll have to lie in that bed, too, if you don't vote for Clinton.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    35. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

      Look, I took a dislike to Wikileaks when members the BNP members list for the UK was 'leaked'. I despise the BNP but undermining peoples political agency in a democracy, to the extent that people were hounded from employment is unjustifiable.

      These email leaks are justifiable and justice needs to catch up with the scumbags!

    36. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps if Trump hadn't publicly bragged about doing what he is now accused of, his campaign wouldn't be crashing and burning.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    37. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      No he just bragged about walking in models in various states of undress, grabbing women's genitals, and expressing his sexual attraction for his own daughter. He's a real genius alright.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    38. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Not everyone has the same number or size of skeletons in the closet. It is just possible that Trump is not a multiple felon, or alternatively that he was competent at getting rid of the evidence. There is no reason that Hillary or Podesta could not of deleted all of this incriminating evidence from their own devices long before anyone hacked them.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    39. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by wisnoskij · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >Wikileaks has ALWAYS had an agenda

      Don't they just leak anything and everything they can get their hands on? And do not themselves get the leaks, just publish them? I don't think they are hacking Hillary campaign leaders themselves, or turning down juicy leaks from Trump.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    40. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They can only publish what they are given.

    41. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're making an incredible assumption: That WikiLeaks has access to an equal amount of information on other candidates.

      I know that this may disappoint you, but WikiLeaks can only leak information that it has access to. I know, it's weird, it's almost as if they cannot just wish information to appear on their servers.

      If you're so adamant that they release Trump's email, then go get it for them.

    42. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lay what? Eggs? Rather that they should LIE in the bed they made. Forget politics--it's language that is rapidly going to hell.

    43. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by jafiwam · · Score: 1

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

      Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

      Two possible reasons for this:

      Insiders are doing the leaking
      RNC break-ins happened and aren't interesting, exposing corruption isn't fun if there isn't any

      Also note; conservative thought did not do SJW twat-juice battle against Anon and 4chan trying to enforce political correctness. i.e. they aren't angry at the RNC yet.

      You are right, this is vindictive. Deliciously so.

    44. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Publicly bragged while being accidentally recorded on a hot microphone that he wasn't aware of, while a borderline sleazy Access Hollywood guy egged him on with the "wink wink, elbow elbow" giggity routine off camera, supposedly in a trailer? I'm no rabid Trump supporter, but it's not like he was saying this stuff while at a campaign stop in Iowa.

    45. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would anyone want to vote for someone simultaneously as corrupt and stupid/incompetent as clinton?

      She's of the same cloth as bush 1/2 and Obama.

      The last thing this country needs is another bush/Clinton dynastastic royalist idiot in office. Any office.

    46. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      Whatever Hillary is in relation to Trump, in absolute terms she's still a bought and paid for member of the establishment.

      And so is Trump.

    47. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      The fact was he was bragging about sexual assault.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    48. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by swb · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but after November he's just another tax-dodging, whoring member of the tasteless new money class.

      Clinton will be President, which makes exposing her dirty laundry more important.

    49. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by misexistentialist · · Score: 2

      aka what your dad did to your mom, only a believer in Hillary's frigid lesbian death cult would want government to stop daddy

    50. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      When was grabbing women's genitals perfectly alright? And why are you an apologist for sexual assault? Have you no morals? Are you a sociopath?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    51. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by DavidMZ · · Score: 1

      Even without Wikileaks, there's already balance of information: the Republicans have Fox News as an echo chamber.

    52. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1, Insightful

      fivethirtyeight is pretty damn partisan.

      Really, "it's her turn" just like it was Bob Dole's turn. Hopefully it will 'turn' out the same.

    53. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      All these email leaks show the Democrats as making 'disparaging remarks' about all sorts of people. Lots of the people who they claim to champion the rights of, in fact.

      Anybody who thinks Donald Trump doesn't have a chance of being elected is entirely delusional.

    54. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Bragging about sexual assault that there is no firm evidence he committed. He was being a showoff. He is/was enough of a celebrity that women would actually throw themselves at him, so he didn't have to 'take' anything.

      Which is beside the point. The hard evidence of sexual assault and a spouse who enabled it and attacked the victims to help her 'man' is with the Clinton couple. What a couple they have been.

    55. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 0

      Well, when you put it in clinical language like that, it makes you sound like a fucking prude. Not much like a genius, to be certain.

      I know this is the nerd blog, but get a clue.

    56. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Troll

      He doesn't have a chance. There is literally no precedent in the modern era of a candidate coming from as far behind as Trump is less than a month out. He's done, finished, kaput, and he seems to know it, as he transforms his campaign into some sort of bizarre attack machine lashing out at everybody and everything.

      The reality is he never had a chance, and I doubt he ever believed he did. But a lot of rather angry people and some pretty incompetent competition during the Primaries handed probably the most unsuitable big ticket candidate in half a century the nomination.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    57. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      And believe me, the scrutiny and the attacks have just started. Vote for Clinton if you want four more years of this environment. Or maybe two years and a Clinton Half Dollar, but that's conjecture at this point.

    58. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      It's a lot like the Cosby scandal. A famous rich guy sexually assaults women for decades, gets away with it precisely because he's a rich celebrity, and even when some hint of scandal gets out, no journalist dares pounce on it for fear of the fires of legal hell raining down on them, thus encouraging the rich celebrity to continue behaving in that way.

      Well, Cosby got outed by just a handful of accusers, and once you have a few, when you're dealing with a long-term sexual molester, well the dam bursts. Now it's happening to Trump in his turn. He'd best hope that his victims are only interested in depriving him of whatever small chance had of actually winning, and not of doing a Cosby on him. Cosby, at least, is a lot older and may not survive to experience the full onslaught of judicial wrath. Trump is a lot younger.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    59. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      Do Trump supporters like yourself actually believe Clinton is going to go to war against Russia, or that Russia would actually want a war with the US? I've seen hysterical pronouncements before, but this is so over the top it makes me think your family should be worried about your mental health.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    60. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the "sexual assault and depravity" crowd is out to support Donald "Cosby" Trump.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    61. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by xQx · · Score: 3, Funny

      Trump has never said anything so stupid [...]

      Err... have you been watching the same campaign as the rest of us have?

    62. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When the woman consents, maybe?

      Trump was talking about how he was famous enough that women would let him "grab them by the pussy" (as he put it), not that he runs up and grabs random women. He was bragging about how attractive women found him and what they'd let him do.

      I find it amazing how "outraged" people pretend to be about Trump saying the word "pussy" but how they flat-out don't care about a serial-rapist ex-president whose wife, as a defense attorney, helped get a rapist off by attacking the character of his victim.

      But go ahead, go continue to pretend to be outraged about Trump saying "pussy" while refusing to acknowledge the victims of the Clintons.

    63. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by xQx · · Score: 1

      Bragging to an "Access Hollywood" Reporter, on an "Access Hollywood" bus, right before shooting an "Access Hollywood" walk-in.
      Then, the recording was kept for 11 years.

      I'll agree that he never intended those comments be published, but saying it was "accidentally recorded on a [...] microphone that he wasn't aware of" is a bit of a stretch.

    64. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by guruevi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, you have Russian Trump on one end and Obama/Clinton picking a fight so they can blame the Russians. They're already talking about executing retaliatory cyber attacks (at least they're giving Russia advance warning). This might not evolve into a WW3 but with ISIS almost dead, the American leadership needs a new enemy.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    65. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by jhoger · · Score: 1

      Trump.

    66. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Explain what forms of sexual contact in the stated context of "they let you do it" are clearly -not- assault, then.

    67. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 1

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      Like Assange?

      The US has been after him for years, all under Obama's administration.

      Suppose Assange has appealed to Obama for leniency. Obviously, leniency hasn't happened.

      Now suppose Assange approaches Hillary. And for whatever reason, she doesn't want to deal. Maybe she doesn't want to be tarnished by a relationship with Assange/Wikileaks coming out. Maybe Assange tried to blackmail her or force a deal, threatening to leak information if Hillary doesn't call off the hounds when she gets in.

      Whatever reason Assange has for alienating Hillary, he may have an opportunity with Trump. Trump might throw him a bone for his hard work.

      And having made Hillary into an enemy, Assange really doesn't want to see her elected.

    68. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      sexual assault != they let you do it

    69. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by KeensMustard · · Score: 1
      Attacks?

      More like being whacked with wet lettuce at this point.

      It might just be me, but over time it just seems the conspiracy theories about Clinton are just sounding more and more shrill and false. If those guys want to keep at it, then let them, they are only making a rod for their own backs.

    70. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Since he's talking about groping women he's never met before, explain how they grant consent.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    71. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure Wikileaks has an agenda - exposing corruption and duplicity of a cabinet member running for president. Unfortunately for partisans, it gives him the stigma of being an activist.

    72. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by tipo159 · · Score: 1

      You already knew that the DNC liked team-player, loyal soldier Hillary rather than independent, more-interested-in-protesting-than-governing Sanders.

      You need to put emphasis on 'independent'. Sanders was not a member of the Democratic Party until not long before he started running for President. Why is there any expectation that the leadership of the Party? They are there to promote the interests of the Party, which includes promoting people with demonstrated commitment to the Party.

      In exchange for public funding of the parties' primary presidential elections, the general public get some say in the presidential candidate that is selected. Then again, I live in a state where the Democratic Party selects its convention delegates by caucus, where only Party members (or people who state an alignment with the Party) participate in selecting the candidate.

    73. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not a Trump supporter , but I have heard Clinton's neomaccarthyite warmongering hotly defended by her local party-dispatched campaign workers.

    74. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you really think that Secretary Clinton is a terrible choice for president then you were probably far more upset with most of the previous choices. She is a very experienced politician, a very smart and hard-working person, and an extremely honest (as far as politicians go) individual. She's not perfect, but I have a hard time understanding the hatred people espouse towards her when I read her record. Email leaks? Yes. Anything criminal? No. Private foundation? Yes. Anything criminal? No. But still people hate her despite all the good things she has done. I wonder why there is such a double standard.

    75. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 3, Funny

      In California, the night before the primary election, there was an announcement on the news that Clinton had won. Guess what, turnout of Democratic electors was lower than expected. And the claim that Clinton had already won: false. Was that false claim an accident? I don't think so.

      Maybe that was the Russians too. Man those guys are everywhere.

    76. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine if Bernie Sanders had won. We would have had two extremists contesting for the office. Now we have a leftish moderate and an extremist. If one wins we have a real chance of a functioning government. Bernie Sanders is a wonderful protest candidate, but he has never accomplished anything significant, and his relatively extreme stances make him unlikely to ever do so. Politics is about compromise.

    77. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is the establishment bad?
      The establishment is how the world works and how things get done.

      Sure we should work to improve it, but if you try to ignore or break the establishment you won't get anything done.

      In 10 years we will be the establishment. The question is how we change between now and then, not whether someone is part of the establishment or not.

    78. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by quantaman · · Score: 1

      No doubt Trump supporters are chuckling at your realization of this... the same thing Republicans have known for ages about most of the media.

      Or are we to believe it was pure coincidence that an 11 year old Trump tape came out just 48 hours before the debate, and that just days later, several publications had interviews with some of the victims?

      It will be interesting to see/hear what other bombshells both sides have been sitting on for all of this time.

      Well no its not a coincidence.

      Who knows exactly why the Trump tape came out when it did. NBC needed some time to figure out what to do with Billy Bush, maximize news impact, figure out if there was legal liability, not to mention when they found the tape to begin with, etc, etc. And yes, maybe the idea of having an NBC scoop being the turning point in the election was appealing.

      As for the interviews with victims, well that's quite obvious. Any victim who came forward knew there would be a massive smear campaign against them, just look at the years of insults Rosie O'Donnell has experienced for criticizing Trump. Now look at the insults he's throwing at the women who came forward. Are you really so shocked that a woman would prefer to stay anonymous and not risk the wrath of a possible President Trump.

      But when the tape came out they had Trump himself corroborating their stories. And then more victims have stepped forward and started getting media attention which gives other victims even more support.

      It's the same thing that happened to Roger Ailes, one person finally comes forward and the damn breaks and everyone else comes forward. It's the same thing that happened to Bill Cosby too (though Cosby was a lot worse than Trump).

      --
      I stole this Sig
    79. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by quantaman · · Score: 1

      The New York Times will post anything that makes a Republican look bad. Wikileaks handles the stuff NYT doesn't publish about Democrats.

      The New York Times publishes anything that is news worthy, such as stuff involving the Clinton Foundation.

      In general the Wikileaks stuff hasn't been that news worthy. What's the biggest scoop? The Wall Street speeches being less controversial than people thought?

      The NYT also processes and sanitizes info, it doesn't just dump sensitive personal info out there for the world to see. That's the one thing Wikileaks has had wrong from the beginning, some information is supposed to be private.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    80. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by quantaman · · Score: 1

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      Welcome to the real world. Wikileaks has ALWAYS had an agenda, but that was fine for some people when Assange was targeting those they disagreed with. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's suddenly a problem.

      The prospect of powerful entities using Wikileaks as a way to dump information against enemies has always been a concern. It's to Wikileaks' benefit to avoid becoming the puppet of an unethical actor.

      In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

      You're kidding, right? If you're leaking data, you should redact it before you give it to someone else to do with whatever they please, because who is to say that the non-redacted data won't accidentally leak, much less purposefully?

      Now you must be kidding.

      Think of it this way, if a pedophile gave you kiddie porn and you published it, do you really think people would accept the explanation "it's not my fault, I never would have published the pictures if he hadn't given them to me!"

      Wikileaks published the unredacted information. Therefore, Wikileaks is responsible for publishing the unredacted information.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    81. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      The murder of Seth Rich, along with the rumor that he was Wikileak's source for the DNC leaks, puts Assange in a tough position. Whether Seth WAS his source or not, public perception that Wikileaks sources may be killed and their leaked information thus suppressed could make his sources dry up.

      To counter this he has to create the perception that, if you try to plug the leak by plugging the source, it will result in the leaks being more extreme and damaging, rather than less.

      One way to do that is to publish more than would normally be published, and redact it less.

      Perhaps that is what is going on: As with rule 804, where hearsay from a deceased person becomes admissible, insuring that leaks from (or perceived to be from) a murder victim are extreme might help make murder of leakers less likely.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    82. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dynastic is a poor word choice for a fun of someone who inherited $200M in 1970s NYC real estate and has an golden (leaf) throne.

    83. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

      Perhaps if Trump hadn't publicly bragged about doing ...

      The main thing I got out of it was: He said
        - he'd made a pass at a married woman,
        - she'd turned him down,
        - and he took "no" for an answer.

      What a pity the Clintons don't seem to do that. ... what he is now accused of,

      It's the last four weeks of the campaign. There is no longer time for the truth of accusations to come out before election day. Now is the time when, historically, dishonest politicians and/or their supporters have a track record of making up believable lies and broadcasting them.

      So now is the time that I don't believe smear stories - that don't have solid, PRE-EXISTING, evidence to support them - about candidates in a tough race.

      Maybe he did something bad, maybe not. But the spate of accusations certainly seem to be nicely tuned to a narrative based on the recording. The many accusations allegedly took place years ago. If true, they could have been published months ago. Why are they only coming out now, just after the classic cut-in time for fake-story smears? The timing certainly makes them LOOK like they are lies, constructed and carefully tuned for use in the last weeks of the campaign.

      his campaign wouldn't be crashing and burning.

      The last polls I saw (from just after the recent debate, and substantially after the release of the recording, but before the series of accusations) had him pulling ahead by a substantial margin - like by almost the total of the "undecideds".

      My impression is that the only crashing and burning going on is on the part of the Republican politicians who took this opportunity to break their agreements and oppose Trump - only to find he was the one with the bigger army of supporters.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    84. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Doesn't matter who it is, failure to redact passwords, phone numbers, etc, is just wrong.

      As my wife said:

      "THEY read all of OUR communications. Why shouldn't WE read all of THEIRS?"

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    85. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really? I thought they were supporting Bill "Slick Willy" Clinton and the wife, Hillary Clinton, who assassinated the character of the women Bill raped. You know, the "bimbo explosion" and all that. But nobody believes the allegations when they're made against a Democrat outside of an election year, but we do believe an 11th hour media campaign near an election.

      Because if they had crimes to report, why did they wait so many years to talk about this?

    86. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      corrupt goddess of war v. baboon

      This world deserves to go burning in flames even bigger than they already are.

    87. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They used to edit the leaks before publishing them, but various governments have been applying pressure on Assange and on their finances and on any journalist that works with them, so now due to lack of resources they just dump everything.

      In other words, attempts to shut down Wikileaks have only made the leaks that much worse.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    88. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "New money". The Trump family fortune goes back more than a hundred years to when his grandfather was a brothel magnate. Certainly not the oldest money around, but not exactly "new".

    89. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem here is that it looks like Wikileaks trying to sway the partisan pendulum one particular way may be a bought and paid member of the establishment as well.

    90. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Putting Trump leaks on Wikileaks is a waste of space. Anyone can watch those on the news.

    91. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Various governments have cut off much of their funding and intimidated journalists who work with them. Now with the election coming up they are very pressed for time too.

      It's not ideal but given the situation the only other option would seem to be to sit on the leaks until after the new president has been selected. Would that really be better?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    92. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You appear to think that Wikileaks is some omniscient entity. Either that, or you think that Wikileaks receive information about Chinese or Al Qaeda secrets, and refuse to publish them.

      When in reality it's probably a case of people in the US seeing things that don't belong in a democratic republic, and want to alert voters (the top authority in any democracy), where as in China, those things are just how things work in a communist dictatorship, and in Al Qaeda, there is really nothing that's worse than you would expect from a terrorist organization.

    93. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by jfern · · Score: 1

      Good point. There was no Wikileaks nor blaming of the Russians involved with Trump's 2005 comments and his 1995 tax return.

    94. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by jfern · · Score: 2

      Yes, they've even leaked negative things about Russia. Funny that they'd do that if they are all Putin operatives.

    95. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by gtall · · Score: 1

      it wasn't the language Bam-Bam used on the tape. It was what he said about his own actions that is the problem.

    96. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by gtall · · Score: 1

      But Bam-Bam does have a chance of being elected. There's a fair majority of Republicans who think he's the bees knees. Personally, I think they are ignorant gits, just like their hero. How they got to their current dyspeptic view of the world is the real problem. Republican leaders have spent the last 20 years saying one thing to the faithful and another to industry and politicians. Now that they have so convinced their rank and file that they are disenfranchised, they are somehow amazed they feel disenfranchised, no matter how removed from actual fact that is.

      Democrats are similarly culpable in promising their rank and file that if the U.S. is all multi-culti and disengages from the world, its and the world's people will somehow all stick together in some sort of goopy social mass. Their fellow travelers in Hollywood spent the last 20 years producing the dumbest, lamest infotainment and are now aghast the American people have no brains. You can see it in Sander's supporters who got all excited about "free" college. Oh, free for whom? Like the unis wouldn't do precisely what they did the last time the U.S. pissed off a lot of money on unis. They spent it on bureaucracy and hiring each others "stars".

    97. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there's actually a couple of e-mails where the clinton campaign orders "news" from AP, to be delivered on the "appropriate" date

    98. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      The New York Times will post anything that makes a Republican look bad.

      Like when they were at the vanguard of the Watergate scandal ohwait.

    99. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by wiredog · · Score: 1

      a literal rapist who raped multiple women
      So far as I know no literal rapists are running for President.

    100. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you honestly believe Sanders wasn't cheated, you may be interested in my limited-time offer... you see, I have a bridge I'm trying to sell. Seriously though? There was a calculated, coordinated, and methodical plan to disenfranchise his supporters, manipulate media coverage, cancel/move events, spread misinformation... the list goes on. I'm sure some super delegates were paid off, too. Not to mention many places where Sanders won far more of the vote, yet received only slightly more, the same, or in some cases even LESS delegates than the corrupt hag. How's that work?

      But yeah, you keep telling yourself and others that it wasn't rigged. Because, you know, "fivethirtyeight" is totally the paragon of truth.

    101. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Considering that Julian really dislikes Hillary for suggesting that he be droned I thought that much was obvious.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    102. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

      Perhaps not the convention. In California, the night before the primary election, there was an announcement on the news that Clinton had won. Guess what, turnout of Democratic electors was lower than expected. And the claim that Clinton had already won: false. Was that false claim an accident? I don't think so.

      This statement, while correct, is so condensed that it's extremely misleading. The Associated Press announced the night before the California primary that by their reckoning Clinton had enough Super Delegate votes to clinch the nomination for her. As you write it, ,it could be interpreted to mean that somebody announced the night before the primary vote that Clinton had already won the California primary, which is not what happened. I'm not arguing that the AP shouldn't have done this nor am I arguing that there for sure wasn't any kind of insider deal going on with the announcement, but you're going to have to provide more than speculation that this made any difference in the outcome. Sanders failure to clean house on Super Tuesday put him in the position of having to capture an unrealistic number of votes to get the nomination and he didn't even come close to hitting his target.

    103. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      That's my point. Wikileaks only has what they're given, and people only complain about "one-sided leaks" when it's their side. The bias comes from the democrat fanboy, not from Wikileaks.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    104. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone who thinks Donald Trump has a chance of being elected is entirely delusional.

      Anyone who doesn't think Trump has a chance of being elected has their head buried in the sand. The issue for a lot of Americans boils down to this: politics as usual (not a good thing in most people's view) with the most corrupt, bought-out candidate in the history of our country, or a wild card who said some offensive things. When did people start thinking that being offended by somebody's words trumps that person's right to free speech? When did we become a nation of such pussies and snowflakes? I know I'm not the only one sick and tired of this PC crap. I'm not a politician so why in hell would I give two craps about being politically correct with every single little thing I say? Sure, I try not to offend anybody, but I'm not going to bend over backwards to avoid it like people seem to expect these days.

      Yet, the Dems expect us to be outraged over some words on an 11-year old audio tape? Hmm, that's a tough one there -- do I express outrage over 11-year old crude speech, or do I express outrage over evidence of treason, collusion, media manipulation, and the largest corruption of a political group ever exposed to this country? It's a no-brainer.

    105. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The fact that you consider Sanders an extremist is very sad.

    106. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      You pay taxes, willingly! you let them do it.
      You let a cop frisk you at a stop! you let them do it.
      You allow intrusive body scanning at the airport! you let them do it.
      You let the mugger take your wallet! you let them do it.

      It's about power imbalance. You don't have any power to say no in some situations. This is what people are up in arms about. This is a microcosm of what all women already know, they are in situations all the time where they do not feel that they have the power to say no, so they "let" things happen. This is not ok.

      At best, this is men being ignorantly blind to their position of power. At worst (as in the case of Trump) it is exploitation of his power. He states this right there in plain English. Because he has wealth and status, he is able to "get away" with these things and the women he harasses don't put up a fight, which is seen by him (and some others) as "letting" him do these things.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    107. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "let you"

    108. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes, not being a democrat you know nothing about faux outrage. Tell me again how that war on Christmas is working out for you.

    109. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So anything is fair game if the victim doesn't fight back? "You see, he let me shoot him. I mean, if he didn't want to be shot, he wouldn't have let my bullet enter his skull. And he never complained afterward, so it was obviously consensual."

      When dealing with people in a position of power, there is an implicit threat of negative repercussions if you dare to oppose them. With Trump, those threats quickly become explicit; say anything negative about him and the lawsuit threats fly. People will tolerate all sorts of violations out of fear.

    110. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      It only appears one-sided because the media appears quite willing to publish any dirt they can find Trump. We don't need to go to Wikileaks for that.

      We also don't need any single media source to be impartial. We need multiple partial media sources to keep each other on their toes.

      This is how I've always viewed Fox New's claim of "Fair and Balanced"; not internally, everyone knows they're right wing, but in the context of MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NYT, Huffpost, NPR, Salon, Vox, Mic, Mother Jones, etc.. it provides a little balance in the media overall.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    111. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      coming from as far behind

      According to which mainstream media poll? You know, the same mainstream media that's INDISPUTABLY in the bag for the corrupt Clinton campaign.

      probably the most unsuitable big ticket candidate in half a century

      This line, taken out of context, can be applied to either candidate. More for Hillary than Donald, IMO. Careful what you wish for Martian, you just might get it...

    112. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We'll go back to pretending to care about Ukraine.

    113. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since he's talking and not performing actions, explain how consent is even a consideration.

    114. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by s122604 · · Score: 0

      It's not like Trump is talking peace.. And its not Clinton who is promising to inflate the defense budget by trillions of dollars
      And what about the women who might need access to a safe and legal abortion, the kind Trump/Pence promise to "throw on the ash heap of history" -- no skin off you neck, Mr. Leftist purist, I guess

      And what of the poor people who now have access to healthcare via the medicaid expansion, or the affordable care act (which Trump promises to trash on day 1). What about them??

      just collateral damage in the quest for purity I suppose, let em "lay in their beds"

    115. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      When the woman consents, maybe?

      Trump was talking about how he was famous enough that women would let him "grab them by the pussy" (as he put it), not that he runs up and grabs random women. He was bragging about how attractive women found him and what they'd let him do.

      I find it amazing how "outraged" people pretend to be about Trump saying the word "pussy" but how they flat-out don't care about a serial-rapist ex-president whose wife, as a defense attorney, helped get a rapist off by attacking the character of his victim.

      But go ahead, go continue to pretend to be outraged about Trump saying "pussy" while refusing to acknowledge the victims of the Clintons.

      You fail to recognize what it's really about. No one is outraged that he used the word pussy.Trump bragged that he can treat women however he wants because he is a star. He's trying to become president (an even BIGGER star), so imagine what he thinks he can do to women then. PS - Bill Clinton is not running for president and Hillary has forced to take the rapist case (public defender) and did her fucking job. And the rapist did NOT get off.

    116. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Holi · · Score: 1

      Elections are always called before they are over. And they almost always get it right. So somehow the news reports a winner and somehow that means the DNC was cheating? Not sure how you make that leap.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    117. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One sided? Hardly. Trump just doesn't have that much dirt on him except for petty character flaws. Hillary and the corrupt establishment are beyond reproach.

    118. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conspiracy theories? In the face of overwhelming evidence you still call them conspiracy theories? You must be one of the paid shills the Clinton campaign was discovered to have hired to "fix" the comments on websites on the internet. Tell me, when your disgusting corrupt Queen gets into office, what do you think will happen to you? Do you expect some sort of special status or something? Cuz I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen. You're just one of those "useful idiots" and as soon as you're no longer needed, you'll be dropped and forgotten about. Except you'll have helped push this country further into oblivion.

    119. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck your two-party bullshit. You are the problem.

    120. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      And then people started to appear stating that they were victims of the kind of sexual assault he was describing.

      This is how the Bill Cosby apocalypse began, and Cosby's defenders were doing the same dance you are.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    121. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      The only poll that showed that was the LA Times poll, which is a bit notorious because it polls the same people at each iteration. All the other polls, as fivethirtyeight.com show, always showed Clinton ahead. Yes, after the RNC, Trump received a bump that got him within a few points of Clinton, but Clinton's own nomination saw her pull further ahead, and then his dismal performance after the first debate, and the bizarre and pointless Twitter war with the model ex-model he called fat saw him crash, and he's been crashing ever since.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    122. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      This whole "MSM conspiracy" was invoked in 2012 to explain away the fact that Romney was crashing. What's next, you going to point me to some poll "corrections"?

      Trump has lost. If he continues the trend he's in right now, it could very well lead to a landslide victory for Clinton, but one way or another, when you wake up the morning of November 9th, Hillary Rodham Clinton will be President Elect. And I'm sure you've already got your "MSM/Establishment" conspiracy theories ready, and there'll be four endless years of bitching and sniveling, and refusing to admit that Donald Trump was the worst mistake the GOP made since Barry Goldwater.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    123. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      He's describing what he does. We now have people saying he's done it. Maybe they're lying, maybe he's lying, but it's clear someone's lying, and regardless of whose lying, at best it makes Trump look like a misogynistic woman-hating pig. The question really becomes whether the growing number of accusers are liars, and remember how well that's gone for Bill Cosby.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    124. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      It's how Bill Cosby got away with an endless string of sexual assaults for decades.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    125. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      He has a very small chance, less than 20% at this point. The problem for Trump is simple; energizing his base was never going to be enough. The GOP leadership hoped and prayed that once he got the nomination, he'd actually start behaving like someone who wanted to be president, but his refusal to even prepare for the first debate, and the bizarre Twitter war with Machado demonstrated amply that he had no intention of trying to seek broader support.

      You can criticize the Democrats if you want, but when you're trying to win an election, actually trying to get a majority of voters from multiple ethnic backgrounds to weld an electoral coalition actually works. Building broad coalitions is the way you become president. It's how Reagan did it, by reaching across to enough Democratic voters to guarantee victory.

      Fixing all your energy on about 40% of Republican voters was enough to get the nomination, largely because of how conventions work, but Presidential elections don't work like that. At some point, you have to start trying to attract people outside of your echo chamber. That's exactly why the observation "My God, he's going to run as Barry Goldwater" is such an important object lesson for any presidential candidate.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    126. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      It's ultimately an issue for roughly 40% of Republican voters; Trump's base.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    127. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      Holding Russia accountable for its actions has been a general policy of US administrations since Truman.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    128. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Cederic · · Score: 2

      Maybe it's the perception that she's corrupt, malicious, dangerous, untrustable and/or downright evil.

      The FBI compromising their own integrity to protect her hasn't helped, either with public perception of her or in demonstrating that she hasn't broken the law.

      She is a very experienced politician, a very smart and hard-working person, and an extremely honest (as far as politicians go) individual

      Now that's just naive.

    129. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Behind words there is intent and ultimately action.

      Words are not, and have never been the problem with Trump or anyone like him.

      It is about what his words say about his intentions and what they say about his personal insights.

      Words are just words. Everyone knows this. Nobody is offended by simple words. It is the intent behind the words that hurt and offend.

      When you are running for office, people expect the ideal best out of you. That means being honest and trustworthy above all else. If we can't trust what you will do, how can we expect to make any kind of judgment about what your future actions will be?

      This is why being "two faced" when you are a public figure is such a bad thing. Not because we are holding the politician to some kind of moral or PC standard, but because they have proven that they cannot be trusted. And Trump is, frankly, all over the map though some of his true feelings have leaked through the bluster and bravado. Namely his view of women. Also his view of personal gain.

      There is no way you can tell me that Trump cares about anyone but Trump. Everything he has ever done is self aggrandizing and narcissistic.

      Granted, those qualities exist in most politicians, but at least with some of them there was a seed of righteousness in the beginning. I think that to get anywhere greater than a local office, you sell your soul to some degree along the way. But first there was a want or even a need to help and make a difference. I just don't see that with Trump. I see someone who just wants to feed his own ego and doesn't care who he has to step on to meet that end.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    130. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah this is all something that people don't get - political parties are private organizations and not affiliated with the government - only bound by election laws that anyone running is bound by, they can essentially do whatever they want. If people don't like it (which I don't either) then the system needs to be overhauled completely to reduce the ability for 2 private organizations to have so much sway in national elections. IF you are going to do and overhaul... you don't do it in the middle of an election, that is no more intelligent than deciding that you need to make changes to the fire department while they are putting a fire out at your house. You have four years between elections, complaining about the process @ the last few months just shows that you have fake outrage, if you really don't like it, spend the other 3+ years between elections actually making a positive change or you have no one but yourself to blame.

    131. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is a narcissistic idiot. He would have crashed one way or another.

    132. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Julian is mad at the normal world since he has been cooped up in the Ecuadorian embassy for five years. That will make anyone a little crazy.

    133. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the same method as in every case a non-notarized consent to contact happens anywhere, by not saying "no" or pulling back?

      Face it, you've put yourself in the far-Left extreme Feminist position of "all sex is rape".

      How did you know consent was certain the last time you "made a move"?

    134. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've been over this, BetaMartian. According to Hillary Clinton herself, we are to "believe victims when they come forward." So I'm applying that standard to Bill Clinton's victims, and assuming that they're telling the truth. Because Hillary Clinton literally told me to.

      There's no way you can rationally support both Hillary Clinton and claim that Bill Clinton's victims are "alleged." Unless you don't trust Hillary's own platform. In which case, why are you supporting her?!

    135. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      The only poll that showed that was the LA Times poll, ...

      Which "that" are you referring to?

      - If it's who's ahead, you have some point - though the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times "Daybreak" poll is NOT the only one showing Trump ahead by at least a small margin. (In fact it shows them neck-and-neck, crossing back-and-forth, and has Hillary up by 0.3% just now.)

      - If it's how the musdslinging is changing the voters' preferences, it's not fully over that poll's one-to-two-week report delay + smoothing yet.

      In particular (for both cases) I note that this morning's Rasmussen daily tracking poll has Trump slightly ahead AND is starting to have any dings to Trump from the spate of allegations within horizon. Yet they see no such dings (and comment about their absence in the accompanying analysis).

      [USC/L.A. Times] is a bit notorious because it polls the same people at each iteration.

      It's also notorious for being far more accurate when it comes to predicting both the winner and the margin. (The latter can turn into the former if the race is very close, as this one is.) That repeated sampling of varying subsets of the same group is a part of the methodology that they credit for avoiding certain distortions that affect other polls.

      The rationalle is explained on their web site. Give it a look.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    136. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't disagree with you re. the one-sided nature of the leaks, however there are obvious comparisons to be drawn regarding the one-sided nature of the mainstream media outlets. While there are some very serious concerns with Hillary and how her campaign has been run, there is little to no scrutiny from majority of the media. All we see is focus on Trump's (admittedly disgusting) latest comments, with the only coverage on the leaks being "Hillary was hacked by the big bad Russians (who Trump supports, don't you know)".

      Perhaps this "one-sided" nature of the leaks is the only way to get some semblance of balance in reporting...not that most people give a shit about balance anyway.

    137. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      70% of people in prison identify as democrat.

    138. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "alleged victims" funny you say that. If you actually heard the audio of Hillary bragging about getting a rapist off you would hear Hillary even admit that she thought the man was guilty. Or are we talking about Bills accusers here?

    139. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The social expectations of groupies. Assuming Justin Bieber does this, would people make this into a big problem?

    140. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They let you do it" = assault? Liberalism is a mental disorder!

    141. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah Hillary was "forced" but she didn't have to laugh while talking about the rape of a 12 year old girl...that's a little cold.

    142. Re: Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why all the hate Martian man? Is it because NO ONE lets you touch their genitals? I'll let you touch mine if you would like, but I can't promise not to call you a sexual assaulter afterwards.

    143. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one-sided nature of the leaks suggests that either Wikieaks has an agenda, or it is the willing accomplice of someone who has an agenda.

      In any case, the failure to redact phone numbers and other personal information suggests that Wikileaks cannot really be regarded as a reasonable way to leak data.

      Finally, I suspect that the one-sided nature of the leaks is upsetting many people who would otherwise support Wikileaks.

      Truth is truth. Redacted truth is NOT truth. Why is that so hard to understand?

    144. Re:Has Wikileaks jumped the shark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides, what has Hillary actually done?

  10. The Obvious Conclusion: by Hartree · · Score: 4, Funny

    Those b-tard trolls on 4chan have always been tools of Putin and the Russian government, and they are trying to tilt the election!

    Let's investigate the history of finance links between Moot and the Russians. Has he ever attended FSB (He's not old enough for KGB) training? ;) (for the blindly humor impaired)

    1. Re:The Obvious Conclusion: by DaHat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So back when a 4chan user hacked Sarah Palin's personal email... the hacker was doing the bidding of the Russians?

      No doubt the Russian's were angry at the news that she could see them from her house!*

      *Yes I know it's an SNL line, still useful at rare times like this.

    2. Re:The Obvious Conclusion: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moot sold 4chan... Probably to the same Putin hand-puppet that bought /.

    3. Re:The Obvious Conclusion: by Hartree · · Score: 1

      Would you want Sarah Palin peeping in your back window? Sounds pretty creepy to me.

      And Russia blocked 4chan 2 years ago (and 4chan blocked all of Russia for a time this year due to a DDOS).

      Obviously this is all just a cover to throw us off the scent!

    4. Re:The Obvious Conclusion: by Hartree · · Score: 1

      See! You just confirmed Moot's financial link to them!

      It was all a conspiracy, I tell you!

    5. Re:The Obvious Conclusion: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a solution to all this. Vote Hilary a president and Putin will be 'democratically' put aside. No more Putin and with a bit of luck the collateral damage will not be very extensive.
      I laugh my head off when I read this whining about Ruskis. YOu can ask some Macedonian people what they think about foreign forces meddling in their internal affairs. Or any other people that USA brought justice, democracy and human rights to. You people should be fucking ashamed of yourselves - not for attempts to bring such noble things to the people of course but for using this excuse to lay waste all over world. OC the elites are corrupt by nature - that is how they become elites. No country in the West is free from the disease but the US is indeed special in this. What you call it - American exceptionalism? Ha ha ha ha - I laugh my head off indeed. Right I should be crying - shame on you people, shame on you!

      As for Ruskis - they are no better than you of course. But as your president said - it is just a regional power if at all, in other words: it does not compare with monster that you have become. I wonder what the grounding fathers would have said.

    6. Re:The Obvious Conclusion: by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Would you want Sarah Palin peeping in your back window? Sounds pretty creepy to me.

      I dunno.. she's kinda hot, in a way.. or was, back then at least. As long as she didn't talk.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  11. Read the emails! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Read the emails!

    1. Re:Read the emails! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the emails!

      It's okay. That's just locker room emailing.

  12. Is this it? Is this how it begins? by TigerPlish · · Score: 1

    ...and so starts WW III

    Or maybe it's just a storm in a teacup. Can't say quite yet.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
  13. Re:Is this it? Is this how it begins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last world wars all started because someone wanted something big and important like other countries or the world. You're saying some hacked accounts will start the next? I hate to say this but.....really?

  14. change them all so the hackers can't get ya by swschrad · · Score: 2

    I use "asswordP" myself. they'll never guess ;)

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  15. archives: if you want to relive history by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/92620359/
    https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/92627364/

  16. The sad reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sad reality is wikileaks has been infiltrated by Government agents for the purpose of discrediting them.

  17. little people may dispense with encryption now by bentnail · · Score: 2

    It's funny all the politicians railing against encryption so they can foil the next terrorist plot.
    (or spy on their not-so-loyal significant other(s)).
    But when THEY get hacked they'll need some strong encryption to prevent it for themselves.
    Because they are big people-- much smarter than us-- that make the world go round.//end of sarcasm

    Given the level of discourse it seems inconceivable that any party (other than libertarians) have given 1/2 a thought to what
    nefarious legislation the three letter agencies are writing for our own safety after the election.

  18. When have they ever redacted anything? by waspleg · · Score: 1

    I can't find any solid evidence of them EVER doing that?

    A quick search shows something from the pentagon in 2010 which also has myth debunking stuff saying that never happened.

  19. I find this pretty hilarious by anarcobra · · Score: 1

    But these people should remember that these politicians will put a little bit more effort into finding and punishing whoever did this than the average person.

  20. Was it really 4chan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a post on Endchan claimed

    Then it probably wasn't 4chan. There are a lot of other sites out there that run on software derived from 2chan and have "chan" in their name. And many of them have their own /pol/. 4chan's /pol/ would rather have a Happening and find real dirt than erase fucking cell phones. And there is zero indication right now that they even know this happened.

    <sarcasm>Clearly this is a smear campaign by Reddit!</sarcasm>

  21. 400 lb Russian hackers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, so 4chan are the 400 lb Russian hackers? Add the Milo buyout attempt to the mix and hmmm......

  22. Fake news to distract from stuff that matters by zedaroca · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is irrelevant. Hacked people supposedly got hacked again...
    For actual news about the leaks you should go:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/DNCleaks
    https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/575e37/new_wikileaks_podesta_emails_part_five_673_more/
    https://twitter.com/wikileaks

    Sample:

    Best Podesta leak pair: 1) HRC stating in 2014 that the Saud+Qatar govts fund ISIL and 2) Qatar giving Bill Clinton $1m for 5 minute meeting

    ABC Exec Ben Sherwood Pledges "Any and All ABC Platforms" to Help Hillary.

    CNN's Donna Brazile, now head of DNC, tipped off Clinton campaign about debate question

    Algeria Donated to the Clinton Campaign in order to get off the Terror Watchlist, according to Joe Scarborough

    1. Re:Fake news to distract from stuff that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best Podesta leak pair: 1) HRC stating in 2014 that the Saud+Qatar govts fund ISIL and 2) Qatar giving Bill Clinton $1m for 5 minute meeting

      But it was Bill's birthday! Didn't you have an aunt who would give you a roll of quarters for your birthday?

    2. Re:Fake news to distract from stuff that matters by retchdog · · Score: 0

      Hillary Clinton took Satan's Cock in order to gain Unholy Powers and Birth the Antichrist!

      Hillary Clinton distantly related to Donald Trump, Proof of The Illuminati!

      ISIS bought Hillary Clinton a $100K Cardigan for her Birthday!

      Hillary Behind UN Plan to Sterilize American Population!

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    3. Re:Fake news to distract from stuff that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh... thanks for linking to The_Donald, thats a great source for the truth

    4. Re:Fake news to distract from stuff that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Add https://www.voat.co/v/politics to that list.

  23. Re:Is this it? Is this how it begins? by TigerPlish · · Score: 1

    The German side of WWII was started by a false-flag attack on a radio station and a suspicious fire on the Reichstag building. Minor things on their own, but were leveraged into a full invasion of Poland, and well, you know the rest.

    Obama has previously declared that cyber intrusions may be dealt with in meatspace with real weapons. Given all the recent hubbub about supposedly russian h4xx0rz, would it truly be beyond reason that this could escalate hidden in plain view?

    I used to think the tinfoil brigade were paranoid weirdos, but now I wonder if they were right all along: They are *all* out to get you.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
  24. Waiting time. by bjwest · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Who the hell goes twelve hours after learning one of your accounts has been hacked without changing all your passwords? This guy deserved what he got.

    --

    --- Keep the choice with the user..
    1. Re:Waiting time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your grandparents, for sure. What age group do you think these crooked fucks are in?

      I am old enough to have learned programming on a monochrome monitor. I remember a pre-Internet world. And the Clintons were already old people at this point. They grew up in an age where there were 3 television stations and 2 newspapers of note. It was an age where keeping secrets was extremely easy. You could do things practically in public and the press would help keep it down. The press sat on the Lewinsky scandal for over a month before Drudge broke it and forced everyone's hand. That should have been the wakeup call that the world was changing and becoming harder to control, but obviously no one picked up the phone in the Clinton camp.

      Anyway, this is the price you pay for rampant corruption. I honestly don't think it's the Russians. It's a combination of grandma doesn't understand infosec (ie, "I don't understand how I got hacked, the password inspector I spoke to on the phone assured me all my passwords were really good.") combined with disgusted underlings leaking stuff. I would be amazed if there weren't leaks coming from within the NSA and FBI. Comey/Lynch letting Clinton skate was hugely unpopular below the director level.

  25. Fake news, already debunked by zedaroca · · Score: 2

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/786653209825861633

    No they didn't. We checked that the credentials had already been changed.

  26. Not that shocked. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Audit as in, replaced phone/email/computers with securely vetted stuff + had a security contractor audit and harden his accounts with better passwords/2factor/cleaning out cross referenced credentials.

    The thing is, if the Clinton team replaced his gear, it would be running off a server in her basement.

  27. Russians! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out got the Ds

  28. Re:Is this it? Is this how it begins? by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    It would be nice if people trying to make historical comparisons actually had some knowledge of history. First of all, it was five and a half years between the burning of the Reichstag and the invasion of Poland. Second of all, Germany had in fact been planning the Second World War since the 1920s, when the Weimar Republic employed the supposedly disbanded General Staff as "civil servants" so they could spend their days planning for the lightning campaigns that would later become invasions of France and Russia.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  29. beyond the pale by mjmcc · · Score: 1

    A very long time ago, I had a lot of admiration for Julian Assange. The last of that just evaporated completely. At this point, I hope that the Ecuadorian embassy kicks him out so that he can be extradited to the U.S. If Podesta's personal files have indeed been wiped out, I hope the scum who did it get prosecuted as well. No matter which side you are supporting in the election, there is no excuse for that kind of behavior.

  30. Shhh. by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    My password is ********. Seriously 8 *s, No one will ever guess/

    1. Re:Shhh. by jittles · · Score: 2

      My password is ********. Seriously 8 *s, No one will ever guess/

      That looks like hunter2 on my screen. How did you know my password!?!?

    2. Re:Shhh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liar!
      It's space , 8 * and a space after...
      Just the ******** was your last years password...

  31. It wasn't 4chan by LordLucless · · Score: 1

    It was Paul Combetta; he was just being thorough.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  32. Enjoy educating them by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    Hacking them and educating them about the risks is a good thing.

    Things will get tighter and the laws will get harsher.

    Given they've already shown some of the Wikileaks were altered, you need to be careful however. And given that some were released by Russian hackers closely associated with official russian agencies, you need to be even more careful. Trump was already caught quoting a manipulated leaked email.

    As more altered emails come out, our ability to trust leaks will be compromised.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  33. As soon as THEY leave US alone by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

    LEAVE THE DNC ALONE!

    I'll be glad to leave them alone - as soon as they leave US alone.

    Given their past behavior, I doubt they'll EVER do that.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re: As soon as THEY leave US alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me thinks you also missed the reference

  34. Re:personall I think @infosecjackass said it best by Maritz · · Score: 1

    Thought you said it best did you. Weird.

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  35. 4chan password by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    4chan password is OnMyKneesToHillary4Ever It is extra long, but I think people can guess it now.

  36. ReThat's not the DNC way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What you'll see in the next batch of emails:

    staff #1: Shouldn't we do an audit of this stuff
    staff #2: The audit would validate RNC message that we don't do security!
    staff #3: Agree with #2. The audit would support the opposition, which is counterproductive to the campaign
    staff #1: Ok.

    Cmon you guys, we know in the USA (and probably elsewhere) that

    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled."

    is always trumped by

    https://www.google.com/search?q=confidence+is+more+important+than+intelligence

  37. Apple sux by fbobraga · · Score: 1

    enough said

  38. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No respectable Anon would wipe out all evidence of his actions and involvements. That would be stupid.

    Odds are he and his supporters wiped it out, and they are simply blaming Anonymous, in order to save his own ass.

  39. stupid assholes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What these assholes do not understand is that someone will perform this same thing on the GOP (Russia has already stolen 21,000 CC numbers from the web store) and the end result is that the people with the power will pass laws - Dems & Rebs alike, laws that will screw over a lot of decent people. They will also elevate the investigation arm & probably start identifying some of these morons who will end up doing hard time for stupid shit.

  40. Lost their way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wikileaks have lost all semblance of any neutrality. They have in intense anti-America stance, almost an anti-western culture stance. If you look at there releases for the last year. Every single one has to do with America, surprisingly neither Russia nor China have had to worry about them. They only really seem to be interested in embarrassing America. I would not be surprised if it got out that the things released were edited to make things look worse. They stopped being journalists (if they ever were) and instead engage in propaganda.