The issue about all this hacking fake news is that the "hacking" would not have mattered if the emails had not been incriminating. Possibly the worst of it, from Clinton's perspective, was how the DNC colluded with her team to steal the nomination from Sanders.
In other words, it was the corruption rather than the exposure of the corruption that turned off Clinton voters.
The truth is hacking, as in someone managing to break through security, rarely happens. I would guess that 75% of the time, if not more, the data is downloaded and stolen by an insider then passed to someone else for leaking, fraud activity, or whatever. This is especially likely in a case like the federal government leak of employee identity information. No one hacked in; somebody was paid off.
Despite what the "experts" showing up on the fake news channels say, I would guess this also was the case with the DNC leak. The culprit or culprits were probably Sanders supporters among the younger IT people who saw what was going on and decided to take action.
Remember that 27-year-old DNC staffer that worked on the voter database and was murdered last summer? Somebody like that.
But, of course, it must have happened because the CIA says it happened. And we can absolutely trust their highly trained, loyal, and patriotic analysts.
I remember the good old days of freakdom when it was common for leftist hippies to accuse the CIA of carrying out the Kennedy assassination. Or to quote Mr. Rate from the movie Shooter: They also said that artificial sweeteners were safe, WMDs were in Iraq and Anna Nicole married for love.
Recall, too, that the report about the Russian hacking said that both the DNC and the RNC had been hacked -- except the FBI checked the RNC's computers and found no evidence of hacking. Am I being too paranoid if I wonder, since they were wrong or lying about the RNC part of the report, what else might be false?
There is a lot of power to be had in Washington, D.C., and the FBI and the CIA are, in one sense, typical government bureaucracies that work to keep their funding and their influence with Congress and other players while expanding their kingdoms. They do favors for those who promise to help them achieve their goals. Government is always a form of controlled and legalized corruption; the bigger is it, the more corrupt and the less legal.
In other words, it was the corruption rather than the exposure of the corruption that turned off Clinton voters.
The truth is hacking, as in someone managing to break through security, rarely happens. I would guess that 75% of the time, if not more, the data is downloaded and stolen by an insider then passed to someone else for leaking, fraud activity, or whatever. This is especially likely in a case like the federal government leak of employee identity information. No one hacked in; somebody was paid off.
Despite what the "experts" showing up on the fake news channels say, I would guess this also was the case with the DNC leak. The culprit or culprits were probably Sanders supporters among the younger IT people who saw what was going on and decided to take action.
Remember that 27-year-old DNC staffer that worked on the voter database and was murdered last summer? Somebody like that.
But, of course, it must have happened because the CIA says it happened. And we can absolutely trust their highly trained, loyal, and patriotic analysts.
I remember the good old days of freakdom when it was common for leftist hippies to accuse the CIA of carrying out the Kennedy assassination. Or to quote Mr. Rate from the movie Shooter: They also said that artificial sweeteners were safe, WMDs were in Iraq and Anna Nicole married for love.
Recall, too, that the report about the Russian hacking said that both the DNC and the RNC had been hacked -- except the FBI checked the RNC's computers and found no evidence of hacking. Am I being too paranoid if I wonder, since they were wrong or lying about the RNC part of the report, what else might be false?
There is a lot of power to be had in Washington, D.C., and the FBI and the CIA are, in one sense, typical government bureaucracies that work to keep their funding and their influence with Congress and other players while expanding their kingdoms. They do favors for those who promise to help them achieve their goals. Government is always a form of controlled and legalized corruption; the bigger is it, the more corrupt and the less legal.
"The issue about all this hacking fake news is that the "hacking" would not have mattered if the emails had not been incriminating."
ReplyDeleteNailed it in the first sentence.