It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Julian Assange Lies To Trumpbro Hannity, PE Trump Approves

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Also, I would like to point out that this EXACT conflation of Podesta's assigned temporary CAP password with the hack of his Gmail acccount was making the rounds two weeks ago:

DNC Had Virtually No Protections for Its Electronic Systems, Donna Brazile Is a Bald-Faced Liar


Even my meaningless email accounts have two-factor ID and are safer than theirs were. Anyone could have hacked them. After the phishing incident, the jpodesta account went all out and used the password, p@sswØrd. That doesn’t sound un-hackable.




posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   
here's a hot one about brain power at work ..........

Oops: DNC Continued to Email Passwords After They Knew They’d Been Hacked


One email in particular reveals that DNC officials had discovered their email system had been compromised. Yet, instead of taking cautionary steps to prevent future hacks, they sent out new passwords to the team - via email.


genius of the year awards appropriate



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

That's irrelevant to Assange's claim about his gmail password though.

However, I can see why you thought the CAP email was being confused with the gmail, now that you point that out. A seed was planted in your mind.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye



You don't email your password in a phishing scam. You click a phishing link to a fake gmail site and enter it in like you would at an authentic gmail password site.


How can Assange claim to publish emails showing their responses to the phishing emails...if the response is not done through email?

Was Assange lying?

If not, where are the emails?
edit on 4-1-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ColdWisdom


Remind me what is so obvious about it, again?


Because he was being provided a username and password in the context of a new PC being setup at CAP? Are you denying the content of the email now too? Wow. I hope you stretch before you go through these contortions. AND you called me a liar? Lmao. I'm afraid you're a bit triggered!


Podesta's password was password. HRC's private email server was compromised by 5 foreign nations.


Podesta's password to what was "password?" You're basis for saying the Clinton email server was compromised by 5 foreign nations is at BEST a rumor that was reported for exactly a DAY by Fox News as part of a report by Bret Baier that was walked back.

Am I wrong?

Do you have another source other than that walked-back Bret Baier piece or one derived entirely from it?

I know that you don't.

But you just KNOW that's the truth because it's what Kallstrom or Giuliani whispered in Baier's ear the week of the election. Lmao.


But hey, at the rate you're going I'm sure you could get a job writing for WaPo or maybe The New York Times. I wouldn't seek employment from CNN anytime soon, though.


Why bother with all that? I could setup a few WP sites and generate fake news all day and make a killing in ad revenue from people who are choosing to be forcefully ignorant.




posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Email IDs: 34899 & 36355

You can see how the IT guy responded to the phishing email they forwarded to him. And you can see how he prompted Podesta to act on it, instead of ignore it. While he sent a legit link for Podesta to change his password, Podesta used the phishing link.

And then there is this report from the NYT:


Hundreds of similar phishing emails were being sent to American political targets, including an identical email sent on March 19 to Mr. Podesta, chairman of the Clinton campaign. Given how many emails Mr. Podesta received through this personal email account, several aides also had access to it, and one of them noticed the warning email, sending it to a computer technician to make sure it was legitimate before anyone clicked on the “change password” button.

“This is a legitimate email,” Charles Delavan, a Clinton campaign aide, replied to another of Mr. Podesta’s aides, who had noticed the alert. “John needs to change his password immediately.”

With another click, a decade of emails that Mr. Podesta maintained in his Gmail account — a total of about 60,000 — were unlocked for the Russian hackers. Mr. Delavan, in an interview, said that his bad advice was a result of a typo: He knew this was a phishing attack, as the campaign was getting dozens of them. He said he had meant to type that it was an “illegitimate” email, an error that he said has plagued him ever since.


No one is denying the phishing scam ensnared Podesta or how it happened. And, yes, we can see how they responded to the phishing scam...Delevan told Podesta to act on it and his *cough* typo contributed to much confusion.

Why is this so hard to make sense of in light of Assange's statement?

ETA: It is very curious how the NYT says an aide 'had access to it' and is responsible for forwarding to the IT guy. But the chain, itself, doesn't actually show that happening or how exactly it got to the aide to forward to the IT guy.

I noted this in a comment on another thread a few weeks back. Again, I personally think the whole story is shady, shady, shady.
edit on 4-1-2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

More ludicrous conflation and misrepresentation. Here's the email in question:

(larger image)

What's that email subject say?

"Factivists was hacked. Here's our new password"

The Factivists website was hacked. Where was that email sent from? dnc.org. Not the same thing. Also, not to nitpick but on top of everything else, the email was sent in April.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Show me the emails published by Wikileaks that show the response, which included his gmail password as being "password".

That is what Assange claimed.

He said they have emails showing how they responded. How did they respond? Podesta gave out his email password.


edit on 4-1-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye


ETA: I think you fully understand the flaws in the OP and just want to argue or twist the meaning of the OP until you get something right. I think I have more than explained. I need to wrap this up now and get some dinner going here.


I think you're reaching REALLY REALLY far to give Assange undue benefit of the doubt. I'm running out for dinner myself. Enjoy!



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
HAHAHAHA... look at all the people that got triggered by Ante's thread. They are totally losing it.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

You have yet to come up with a plausible alternative explanation for Assange's statement. The best you've come up thus far is that by "Podesta gave out that his password was the word 'password'" what Assange really meant was that Podesta entered his password into a phishing site and it was captured.

I don't even know if I'd go with that if Assange wasn't a native English speaker. Who would use the phrasing "gave out that his password was" to mean that somebody's password was captured by a fake login screen? Really? Reeeeaaaaaaaally?




posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

That's not how I understand him, although I disagree with him that we see Podesta responding to anything in the email chain, in question, at all. Just the aide and the IT guy. Again, I have noted that before. It struck me as odd before this interview with Assange.

However, Assange does goes on to describe the actual email responses and says we see how "they" responded.

When he says that Podesta responded by giving out his password as 'password,' it's understood that is not part of the email response because that's not how phishing scams work and that's not how the one Podesta received worked. It contained a phishing link. So it's a given that the password wasn't given out in an email. Or it was for me because I knew how they worked already.

Assange does go on to actually describe the email responses with the aide and the IT guy, though.

And, as I have also said, no one has proven Assange correct or incorrect. I never said Assange's claims about Podesta's password had been verified in any way. I just said they hadn't been proven to be false and he would probably be in a position to know his password given he leaked 50,000+ of Podesta's emails.

Podesta can certainly make a statement if Assange is wrong though. Unless he likes being thought of as a total dumb@ss and doesn't want to damage Assange's credibility and is willing to fall on his sword for him.

I don't expect Podesta will dispute it though.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: MotherMayEye

You have yet to come up with a plausible alternative explanation for Assange's statement. The best you've come up thus far is that by "Podesta gave out that his password was the word 'password'" what Assange really meant was that Podesta entered his password into a phishing site and it was captured.

I don't even know if I'd go with that if Assange wasn't a native English speaker. Who would use the phrasing "gave out that his password was" to mean that somebody's password was captured by a fake login screen? Really? Reeeeaaaaaaaally?



Again, that's not how phishing scams work so it's a 'd'uh' to me that the actual password was not part of the email response. The email 'response' was described by Assange though. He did talk about the IT guy telling Podesta it was a 'legitimate email.'

I think you are getting hung up on some minutia that's really meaningless.

If Assange is wrong, certainly Podesta could and should correct him. So let's see if that happens.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Also, Assange said himself that they published several emails which show Podesta responding to a phishing email. He then says "how did they respond? Podesta gave out that his password was the word ‘password'".

So if we take Assange at his word, could you please provide the published emails that show the password for the gmail account was "password"?

In case you need to hear his own words, hear is the vid: Skip to around 27:30



WOW! What a run around of plausible deniability and total BS dance of deflection and distraction. I don't how anyone can say, after listening to that interview, really, that Assange is saying that Russia wasn't responsible for the DNC hackings! It's a game of "Battleship"! The way Assange is dancing around the blind target making so easy to see where his Russian Aircraft Carrier is! LOL

For example, he complains that WikiLeaks wasn't mentioned in the intel report, then he goes on to "imagine" what they would have said about WikiLeaks, had they mentioned WikiLeaks, and proceeds to make a case!

The US Intel Agencies didn't get their evidence of Russian hacking from WikiLeaks! They got it from the hacked servers and computers themselves.





edit on 4-1-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye



That's not how I understand him, although I disagree with him that we see Podesta responding to anything in the email chain, in question, at all.


So he was mistaken or lying?



However, Assange does goes on to describe the actual email responses and says we see how "they" responded.


Ok. Show me those emails with the info he claimed.



When he says that Podesta responded by giving out his password as 'password,' it's understood that is not part of the email response because that's not how phishing scams work and that's not how the one Podesta received worked. It contained a phishing link. So it's a given that the password wasn't given out in an email. Or it was for me because I knew how they worked already.


Then why did Assange say what he said?

See where this is going?

The OP was right.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I think Assange was intentionally clumsy & careless with his wording from what I saw.

Also, I gave you the email IDs already: 34899 & 36355

Here is a portion of the chain he described:


*From:* Charles Delavan
*Date:* March 19, 2016 at 9:54:05 AM EDT
*To:* Sara Latham , Shane Hable <
shable@hillaryclinton.com>
*Subject:* *Re: Sоmeоne has your passwоrd*

Sara,

This is a legitimate email. John needs to change his password immediately,
and ensure that two-factor authentication is turned on his account.

He can go to this link: myaccount.google.com/security to do both.
It is absolutely imperative that this is done ASAP.

If you or he has any questions, please reach out to me at 410.562.9762


OP said he proved Assange lied about giving out his password as 'password' with the CAP email. And that is, in fact, wrong. Assange has not been proven to be correct or incorrect about that.
edit on 4-1-2017 by MotherMayEye because: disabled the phishing link



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I agree that Assange is carefully nuancing his words.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
I think you're reaching REALLY REALLY far to give Assange undue benefit of the doubt.


Let me make this clear again, I'm not giving Assange any benefit of the doubt. I am saying that his claim about Podesta giving out his password as 'password' has not been proven to be true or false.

It is what it is. I take it all with a grain of salt because the situation is just bizarre, IMO.



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: theantediluvian

You make too much sense, which seems to scare people. LOL.



Oh please, nothing either one of you post makes much sense. If a right winger told you that water was clear you would argue that it wasn't. That's what's scary, it's certainly not that you and your little entourage make too much sense. The fact that ya'll post nothing but provocative negative drivel on this site pretty much sums up your intellect for most of us. I do find some humor in the fact that ya'll actually believe the crap you continue to post. Can't fix stupid I guess.
edit on 4-1-2017 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Thank you again for the humor.

The Gordian knot was not as complex as what you have laid out as a hypothesis.

I wonder sometimes... do you just draw a topic from the news, wonder how far "out there" you can go with it and still keep your 12 fans on here starring you? Some sort of pseudo intellectual trophy hunt?

Because this thread is just an exercise in mental masturbation. But you have people responding. I think Introvert, for instance, may need a U2U assurance soon.

Well done!!!




new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join