No agency examined DNC servers. But we are to believe that the Russians hacked the election.

[Lewdog]

What do you mean you haven't seen the evidence? You've seen the emails right? You've seen the news reports on the WikiLeaks releases right? You've read the threads here right? So is it your opinion those emails were damning enough to effect the election or not?

Well all of us including Sanders supporters just had their worst suspicions by the emails. We had suspected. But now we were validated.

As far as influencing the election would you seriously want an investigation to include how the DNC sabotaged Bernie Sanders? Or how all the key media outlets in America sought to smear and slander Trump with lies?

Lies about Trump? Are you kidding? Trump flat out gets caught in lie after lie....

Sanders got screwed... but I guarantee if you ask him point blank what is more important what they did to him, or that the Russians hacked the DNC and released the info, he is going to say the Russian hack every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

In other words: Sanders got screwed and that's OK with you.

No it isn't ok with me... but when confronted with two evils, I know which one is the more important one.

Again... so if a girl gets sexually assaulted, do you blame her for dressing slutty?

I'd like to see President Trump initiate a full investigation of all the people involved in trying to foment war with Russia for petty political purposes.

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Hey, here's an awesome idea: Let's continue using the same people who fucked everything up.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Well all of us including Sanders supporters just had their worst suspicions by the emails. We had suspected. But now we were validated.

As far as influencing the election would you seriously want an investigation to include how the DNC sabotaged Bernie Sanders? Or how all the key media outlets in America sought to smear and slander Trump with lies?

Lies about Trump? Are you kidding? Trump flat out gets caught in lie after lie....

Sanders got screwed... but I guarantee if you ask him point blank what is more important what they did to him, or that the Russians hacked the DNC and released the info, he is going to say the Russian hack every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

In other words: Sanders got screwed and that's OK with you.

No it isn't ok with me... but when confronted with two evils, I know which one is the more important one.

Again... so if a girl gets sexually assaulted, do you blame her for dressing slutty?

I'd like to see President Trump initiate a full investigation of all the people involved in trying to foment war with Russia for petty political purposes.

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

I wonder if Angela Merkel, and dozens of other world leaders, were surprised to find out that US intelligence services were monitoring all their private communications? What do you think? Were they just pretending to be upset about it?

 

[Lewdog]

Lies about Trump? Are you kidding? Trump flat out gets caught in lie after lie....

Sanders got screwed... but I guarantee if you ask him point blank what is more important what they did to him, or that the Russians hacked the DNC and released the info, he is going to say the Russian hack every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

In other words: Sanders got screwed and that's OK with you.

No it isn't ok with me... but when confronted with two evils, I know which one is the more important one.

Again... so if a girl gets sexually assaulted, do you blame her for dressing slutty?

I'd like to see President Trump initiate a full investigation of all the people involved in trying to foment war with Russia for petty political purposes.

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

I wonder if Angela Merkel, and dozens of other world leaders, were surprised to find out that US intelligence services were monitoring all their private communications? What do you think? Were they just pretending to be upset about it?

Again... Germany was so pissed that they helped the U.S. determine that it was Russia that hacked the DNC.

 

[Pop23]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

 

[Lewdog]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

 

[Pop23]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

 

[Lewdog]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

 

[rdean]

I'm looking for any update and can't find any. Is this some sort of monumentally bad fucking joke? What game is this shit all about?

"The FBI never examined the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) computer servers during its investigation into Russian attempts to interfere in the presidential election, BuzzFeed reports.

“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (D.C.) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker told BuzzFeed in an email.

According to one intelligence official who spoke to the publication, no U.S. intelligence agency has performed its own forensics analysis on the hacked servers."


FBI never examined hacked DNC servers itself: report

Trump, Russia and the U.S. Election - FactCheck.org

Multiple organizations studied the DNC servers.

I don't know I would want the FBI looking at my server when we know they are partisan and working to affect the outcome of the election. The FBI was the last to finally admit Russian hacking.

So many Russians on the USMB these days. Those cockroaches infest every thing they touch.

 

[Pop23]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

 

[Lewdog]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

I want to know why people on here think that by asking questions that no one is privy to the answer to suddenly means everything about the situation is invalid.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

In other words: Sanders got screwed and that's OK with you.

No it isn't ok with me... but when confronted with two evils, I know which one is the more important one.

Again... so if a girl gets sexually assaulted, do you blame her for dressing slutty?

I'd like to see President Trump initiate a full investigation of all the people involved in trying to foment war with Russia for petty political purposes.

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

I wonder if Angela Merkel, and dozens of other world leaders, were surprised to find out that US intelligence services were monitoring all their private communications? What do you think? Were they just pretending to be upset about it?

Again... Germany was so pissed that they helped the U.S. determine that it was Russia that hacked the DNC.

Again: Based on what evidence?

 

[Lewdog]

No it isn't ok with me... but when confronted with two evils, I know which one is the more important one.

Again... so if a girl gets sexually assaulted, do you blame her for dressing slutty?

I'd like to see President Trump initiate a full investigation of all the people involved in trying to foment war with Russia for petty political purposes.

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

I wonder if Angela Merkel, and dozens of other world leaders, were surprised to find out that US intelligence services were monitoring all their private communications? What do you think? Were they just pretending to be upset about it?

Again... Germany was so pissed that they helped the U.S. determine that it was Russia that hacked the DNC.

Again: Based on what evidence?

Based on what evidence? They compared the information given to them from when Russia hacked Germany... it's in the report...

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

I want to know why people on here think that by asking questions that no one is privy to the answer to suddenly means everything about the situation is invalid.

We should just take their word for it. Why even ask questions?

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

I'd like to see President Trump initiate a full investigation of all the people involved in trying to foment war with Russia for petty political purposes.

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

I wonder if Angela Merkel, and dozens of other world leaders, were surprised to find out that US intelligence services were monitoring all their private communications? What do you think? Were they just pretending to be upset about it?

Again... Germany was so pissed that they helped the U.S. determine that it was Russia that hacked the DNC.

Again: Based on what evidence?

Based on what evidence? They compared the information given to them from when Russia hacked Germany... it's in the report...

Report? Is that what you call it? A report with no source and no evidence.

 

[Lewdog]

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

I want to know why people on here think that by asking questions that no one is privy to the answer to suddenly means everything about the situation is invalid.

We should just take their word for it. Why even ask questions?

No, why ask questions that you know you can't get answered because it is Classified information that you aren't and will never be privy to?

 

[Lewdog]

Hacking into a political party for the purposes of influencing the election is petty? How un-American of you.

So do you accuse a woman that gets sexually assaulted of deserving it for dressing slutty?

I wonder if Angela Merkel, and dozens of other world leaders, were surprised to find out that US intelligence services were monitoring all their private communications? What do you think? Were they just pretending to be upset about it?

Again... Germany was so pissed that they helped the U.S. determine that it was Russia that hacked the DNC.

Again: Based on what evidence?

Based on what evidence? They compared the information given to them from when Russia hacked Germany... it's in the report...

Report? Is that what you call it? A report with no source and no evidence.

No source or evidence? Is that your final answer?

 

[Pop23]

So if I get this right.......

The FBI contacts the DNC and tell them they suspect that their servers were hacked, then instead of inviting the FBI in to examine it, the DNC instead allows a private contractor in? And the private contractor then reports their findings to the FBI?

Is this correct?

Who hired the contractor?

The DNC or the FBI?

I think the more important question to ask is, how did the FBI know that the Russians had hacked the DNC without having access to the servers?

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

I want to know why people on here think that by asking questions that no one is privy to the answer to suddenly means everything about the situation is invalid.

The hiring of the company would most likely not be classified. So who hired them? When were they contracted, by whom and when was the examination completed.

Then, when did they brief the various intelligence agencies.

Seems like everyone would need this info to make sense of the situation.

 

[Pop23]

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

I want to know why people on here think that by asking questions that no one is privy to the answer to suddenly means everything about the situation is invalid.

We should just take their word for it. Why even ask questions?

No, why ask questions that you know you can't get answered because it is Classified information that you aren't and will never be privy to?

Why would hiring an outside contractor be classified? Especially if they were hired by the DNC?

Something's amiss here

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

There could be several ways, but that's off topic.

Who hired the contractor, the DNC or the FBI?

How is that off topic? How did the FBI know to warn the DNC that they were hacked by Russia if they didn't have access to the server? Then comes, who recommended CrowdStrike be hired?

You brought up CrowdStrike as the source of the report.

The question is simple enough. Who hired them, the DNC or the FBI?

Why the deflection?

I want to know why people on here think that by asking questions that no one is privy to the answer to suddenly means everything about the situation is invalid.

We should just take their word for it. Why even ask questions?

No, why ask questions that you know you can't get answered because it is Classified information that you aren't and will never be privy to?

How convenient. Any luck with finding the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq yet?