Buffalo Pundit what do you think of Hillary's comment?

[Save Us]

Of all the people to get their panties in a bunch over embarrassing emails being made public for political reasons.....

Apparently some of us are not smart enough to see that hacking is the new norm, yet they are so shocked when it happens. It happens all over the world every day....Russia hacking bad...Hilliary being careless with emails that could get hacked...bad and stupid. Guess she couldn't find those hard drives to bleach..

Who is the stupid one for not locking your car door in a bad neighborhood?

So guess what? we all better get used to it. I can't believe people are so surprised by this... like we needed hacking by anybody to show what nefarious things the Clinton's are in to. Hilarious.

[nogods]

You're right. The election wasn't hacked, but emails were - they were private communications that hackers with ties to Russian intelligence stole and then gave to Wikileaks, which released them. Many emails were embarrassing, and there isn't a person alive who wouldn't be embarrassed if years' worth of their entire email correspondence was released to the press. To suggest that it didn't impact the election is ludicrous. Wikileaks' publication of people's stolen private communications were timed for maximum impact, by Assange's own admission.

What's going to be fun is when some intelligence service decides it's more advantageous to screw with Republicans rather than Democrats, and we see theft and publication of RNC or Bannon emails, and then we'll have an even more interesting discussion about the import of Russian meddling in our domestic affairs because so many Republicans right now are either filled with partisan schadenfreude, like Putin, like that it was these particular victims who were exposed, etc.

Again, the only impact on the election, if any, was the CONTENT of the emails, and Hillary, Posdesta, Uma, and crew were entirely responsible for the CONTENT of those emails.

And as long as we are going to play the speculation game (because no one has any evidence whatsoever of the motives for the hacking and release of the email) we can equally speculate that the RNC email was hacked but nothing of interest was found to release. That speculation is just as valid as your speculation.

As a voter, would you rather not know of Hillary's machinations?

If a thief broke into your neighbor's home, stole his laptop, then got caught by the police, and then the thief told the police "I looked on his laptop - he has a list of dates, times, and places he has sexually molested children, and a list of planned dates, times, and places he intends to wager jihad at a mall..." would you be all "it's unfair to the victim of the theft to use that information against him"?

Yes, we should investigate the hacking to determine who did it and how they did it and if it is possible to prevent in the future or take action against those who did it.

But we should also be thrilled that the underhanded corrupt crooked machinations of the Hillary gang were exposed.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Apparently some of us are not smart enough to see that hacking is the new norm, yet they are so shocked when it happens. It happens all over the world every day....Russia hacking bad...Hilliary being careless with emails that could get hacked...bad and stupid. Guess she couldn't find those hard drives to bleach..

Here is the thing. Nothing is 100% secure on the web. NOTHING.

The thing about Clinton is with all of her 'experience' as Secretary of State she should have or did know this reality. Yet she still decided to use a private email server and even worse she had an absolute moron manage that server. Combine her knowledge of understanding of the risks with technology and the $1b of her campaign and the hundreds of millions at her disposal through the Clinton foundation...they used an ABSOLUTE MORON to manage the private email server. The guy went to Reddit and Stack Exchange to get answers on how to do stuff for Christ Sake.

This tells me one of two things. Either Clinton learned nothing in her time as Secretary of State or decades of government service or she willingly allowed a moron to run her technology because he could be trusted not to leak the nefarious reasons for the private email server.

If anyone wants to know the end of the story. The morons name is Paul Combetta and the Obama Justice Department gave him immunity.

[BorderBob]

Many emails were embarrassing, and there isn't a person alive who wouldn't be embarrassed if years' worth of their entire email correspondence was released to the press.

I don't know about that. It didn't seem to affect or embarrass Paladino.

What's going to be fun is when some intelligence service decides it's more advantageous to screw with Republicans rather than Democrats, and we see theft and publication of RNC or Bannon emails, and then we'll have an even more interesting discussion about the import of Russian meddling in our domestic affairs because so many Republicans right now are either filled with partisan schadenfreude, like Putin, like that it was these particular victims who were exposed, etc.

I'm with the consensus on this one, the emails stolen from the GOP (and there were in the same attacks) will likely be held for traditional espionage activities, Insuring certain powerful GOP members stay in line with Trump's (Putin's) agenda.

Which brings us to this much anticipated "retaliation" Obama spoke of and members of the political establishment seem to expect. Traditional signals intelligence is typically used to learn what your adversary is thinking and perhaps to shape it or use it to compromise individuals. It is used internally. It has never really been weaponized as it was against Clinton. And it only really works when other forms of communication or information are compromised, such as the American media has been. By its own hand and/or amplified by Trump. To expect the U.S. to retaliate as if this were a kinetic form of attack is a bit uninformed, since the Russian President is unlikely to be affected in the same way as the U.S. That whole open society thing and all.

It isn't like going to the U.N. with pictures of missile launchers on Cuban beaches or WMD trailers in the Iraqi desert. (Oh wait, nevermind that second one.)



b.b.

[WNYresident]

Of all the people to get their panties in a bunch over embarrassing emails being made public for political reasons.....

That is a good one...



Alan used emails against people he doesn't want in office. I just googled "buffalopundit carl paladino email"

I don't know why he would question any of this.


5 Years Later, Tea Party Wants to Re-litigate Carl's Emails

http://www.dailypublic.com/articles/...e-carls-emails

I am prepared — at any time — to produce the emails in question to anyone, provided that my source’s identity remains protected.

Far as we know they were hacked. Speculation can go a long way.

What's going to be fun is when some intelligence service decides it's more advantageous to screw with Republicans rather than Democrats, and we see theft and publication of RNC or Bannon emails, and then we'll have an even more interesting discussion about the import of Russian meddling in our domestic affairs because so many Republicans right now are either filled with partisan schadenfreude, like Putin, like that it was these particular victims who were exposed, etc.

Perhaps Alan can give the intelligence services a few pointers.

[buffalopundit]

Of all the people to get their panties in a bunch over embarrassing emails being made public for political reasons.....

There's a difference between a recipient of emails providing them to a media outlet and someone hacking into someone's account and stealing materials.

[buffalopundit]

Again, the only impact on the election, if any, was the CONTENT of the emails, and Hillary, Posdesta, Uma, and crew were entirely responsible for the CONTENT of those emails.

And as long as we are going to play the speculation game (because no one has any evidence whatsoever of the motives for the hacking and release of the email) we can equally speculate that the RNC email was hacked but nothing of interest was found to release. That speculation is just as valid as your speculation.

As a voter, would you rather not know of Hillary's machinations?

If a thief broke into your neighbor's home, stole his laptop, then got caught by the police, and then the thief told the police "I looked on his laptop - he has a list of dates, times, and places he has sexually molested children, and a list of planned dates, times, and places he intends to wager jihad at a mall..." would you be all "it's unfair to the victim of the theft to use that information against him"?

Yes, we should investigate the hacking to determine who did it and how they did it and if it is possible to prevent in the future or take action against those who did it.

But we should also be thrilled that the underhanded corrupt crooked machinations of the Hillary gang were exposed.

Query: Will you be equally as thrilled when the "underhanded corrupt crooked machinations of the" Trump "gang" are exposed?

[buffalopundit]

That is a good one...



Alan used emails against people he doesn't want in office. I just googled "buffalopundit carl paladino email"

I don't know why he would question any of this.


5 Years Later, Tea Party Wants to Re-litigate Carl's Emails

http://www.dailypublic.com/articles/...e-carls-emails



Far as we know they were hacked. Speculation can go a long way.



Perhaps Alan can give the intelligence services a few pointers.

"Far as we know they were hacked"? My source was one of the recipients of the emails. We verified with other recipients that they had received them and they were authentic. No one hacked into anyone's email system.

[WNYresident]

"Far as we know they were hacked"? My source was one of the recipients of the emails. We verified with other recipients that they had received them and they were authentic. No one hacked into anyone's email system.

So if Hillary's emails were just forwarded to someone who received them no one could complain they were used against her?

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

There's a difference between a recipient of emails providing them to a media outlet and someone hacking into someone's account and stealing materials.

I did't comment on how the emails were acquired. I commented on how they were being used.

You released those emails because I assume you thought you were doing the public good in exposing Carl. Wikileaks did the same. For some reason you want Wikileaks to hold themselves to a standard that you don't hold yourself to. That's amusing.

[buffalopundit]

So if Hillary's emails were just forwarded to someone who received them no one could complain they were used against her?

I don't know what you're talking about. No one stole and published Hillary Clinton's emails.

[buffalopundit]

I did't comment on how the emails were acquired. I commented on how they were being used.

You released those emails because I assume you thought you were doing the public good in exposing Carl. Wikileaks did the same. For some reason you want Wikileaks to hold themselves to a standard that you don't hold yourself to. That's amusing.

Except Wikileaks was fencing stolen property. I wasn't. It was given to me by someone who had a legal right to possess the information.

The fact that you don't comprehend the difference - or that you're being deliberately obtuse - is amusing.

[nogods]

Query: Will you be equally as thrilled when the "underhanded corrupt crooked machinations of the" Trump "gang" are exposed?

Yes, I would prefer to know of corruption form any political leaders, just like I'd prefer to know if one of my neighbors is planning a jihad.

That doesn't condone or encourage lawlessness. We can still prosecute the illegal means used to obtain the information, but turning the child pornographer into a victim because a thief stole his laptop is irrational and silliness to the highest degree.

Her problems was the content of the emails, not how they came to the knowledge of voters.

[buffalopundit]

Yes, I would prefer to know of corruption form any political leaders, just like I'd prefer to know if one of my neighbors is planning a jihad.

That doesn't condone or encourage lawlessness. We can still prosecute the illegal means used to obtain the information, but turning the child pornographer into a victim because a thief stole his laptop is irrational and silliness to the highest degree.

Her problems was the content of the emails, not how they came to the knowledge of voters.

Which emails?

[WNYresident]

I don't know what you're talking about. No one stole and published Hillary Clinton's emails.

Who's email is the NY Times writing about?

WASHINGTON — The State Department is expected to release the first batch of emails from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email address in the coming days.

The emails set for release, drawn from some 55,000 pages and focused on Libya, have already been turned over to the special House committee investigating the 2012 attacks on the United States outposts in Benghazi. The New York Times has obtained about a third of the 850 pages of emails.

They capture the correspondence and concerns expressed among Mrs. Clinton, who was secretary of state at the time, and her advisers following the attacks, which claimed the lives of the American ambassador, J. Christopher Stevens, and three other Americans.

The emails also offer occasional glimpses into the private side of Mrs. Clinton’s life, such as her public-radio listening habits and the fact that she was complimented for how she looked in a photo that appeared on the front page of The Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/us...ibya.html?_r=0