Mueller's 'Right Hand Man' Represented Hillary Clinton Staffer Who Installed Her Illegal Server

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: introvert

We got it.

It's ok to let Hillary's team off for lying to the fbi, but not trumps team.

Your spinning for why this is ok is admirable.

Well, at least you do not refute the fact you were ignorant of the facts in this case.

And let's make this very clear. Members of Trump's team were let off of much bigger charges in a plea deal in which they plead guilty to lying, which is small potatoes in comparison, in exchange for their cooperation in the investigation.

Hillary's people got off for lying to the FBI.

Trump's people got off for possible FARA violations and even possible violations of the Logan Act.

So do you want to continue down this road?

Yet we know the podesta group were left off for fara act violations too.

Papadopoulos was charged only with lying, nothing else.

If he was charged with that, Why not mills and huma?

I am not ignorant of the cares at all.

You are just once more proving you are so partisan that you are ok with the double standard.

a reply to: Grambler

Yet we know the podesta group were left off for fara act violations too.

No we don't. That aspect has not come to any final conclusion, as far as I have seen. That is still up in the air.

But that's a nice deflection.

Papadopoulos was charged only with lying, nothing else.

In exchange for his cooperation with the investigation.

If he was charged with that, Why not mills and huma?

Because the situations are different?

Again, it's another false equivalence.

I am not ignorant of the cares at all.

It appears you are. There seem to be many facts you are not aware of. Otherwise you would not be pushing disinformation, such as the stonewalling aspect.

You are just once more proving you are so partisan that you are ok with the double standard.

No. You are proving that, once again, you are misinformed and do no understand the meaning of nuance.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Grambler

If true it will shock no one.

Oh surely the lefties will feign shock...

originally posted by: rickymouse
They sure are digging up a lot of stuff on this bunch. The FBI seems to be in the Democrats pocket, maybe we should be investigating the assets and income of the high ranking FBI people.

Maybe we should be bringing up charges against Meullers right hand man for not saying he has ties with the Democratic party which should cause him from being ineligible from working on this investigation.

Now that is the right thing to do. If these were in fact innocent mistakes we can all move on. If not, there is a process already in place to deal with them.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: theantediluvian

Well the direct victims of the Russian hacking are the DNC/staffers and John Podesta.

Let me stop you right there, the DNC may or may not have been hacked but Podesta certainly was not.

He was phished and fell victim to the attempt due to a typo made by one of his staff members.

March 19, 2016 - Clinton campaign manager, John Podesta receives a phishing email masked as an alert from Google that another user had tried to access his account. It contains a link to a page where Podesta can change his password. He shares the email with a staffer from the campaign's help desk. The staffer replies with a typo - instead of typing "This is an illegitimate email," the staffer types "This is a legitimate email." Podesta follows the instructions and types a new password, allowing hackers to access his emails.

CNN timelines of DNC hack

I mean, come on. That's a pretty stupid mistake to have made.

Phishing is the most basic form of hacking and the easiest for hackers. I honestly dont know where the phishing isnt hacking things started but I know that the GOP have been using it.

Phished usually means the victim was a major dumbass... to others observing the stupidity,, just sayin...

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: theantediluvian

Well the direct victims of the Russian hacking are the DNC/staffers and John Podesta.

Let me stop you right there, the DNC may or may not have been hacked but Podesta certainly was not.

He was phished and fell victim to the attempt due to a typo made by one of his staff members.

March 19, 2016 - Clinton campaign manager, John Podesta receives a phishing email masked as an alert from Google that another user had tried to access his account. It contains a link to a page where Podesta can change his password. He shares the email with a staffer from the campaign's help desk. The staffer replies with a typo - instead of typing "This is an illegitimate email," the staffer types "This is a legitimate email." Podesta follows the instructions and types a new password, allowing hackers to access his emails.

CNN timelines of DNC hack

I mean, come on. That's a pretty stupid mistake to have made.

Phishing is the most basic form of hacking and the easiest for hackers. I honestly dont know where the phishing isnt hacking things started but I know that the GOP have been using it.

Phished usually means the victim was a major dumbass... to others observing the stupidity,, just sayin...

Doesnt make it not hacking because someone was stupid.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: theantediluvian

Well the direct victims of the Russian hacking are the DNC/staffers and John Podesta.

Let me stop you right there, the DNC may or may not have been hacked but Podesta certainly was not.

He was phished and fell victim to the attempt due to a typo made by one of his staff members.

March 19, 2016 - Clinton campaign manager, John Podesta receives a phishing email masked as an alert from Google that another user had tried to access his account. It contains a link to a page where Podesta can change his password. He shares the email with a staffer from the campaign's help desk. The staffer replies with a typo - instead of typing "This is an illegitimate email," the staffer types "This is a legitimate email." Podesta follows the instructions and types a new password, allowing hackers to access his emails.

CNN timelines of DNC hack

I mean, come on. That's a pretty stupid mistake to have made.

Phishing is the most basic form of hacking and the easiest for hackers. I honestly dont know where the phishing isnt hacking things started but I know that the GOP have been using it.

Phished usually means the victim was a major dumbass... to others observing the stupidity,, just sayin...

Doesnt make it not hacking because someone was stupid.

Phishing usually means a malware worm will be damaging your software not data mining and are clicked by the dummy who should know better is the difference.

a reply to: Justoneman

No.

Phishing means something quite different.

Phishing is the attempt to obtain sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, and credit card details (and money), often for malicious reasons, by disguising as a trustworthy entity in an electronic communication.[1][2]

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Justoneman

No.

Phishing means something quite different.

Phishing is the attempt to obtain sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, and credit card details (and money), often for malicious reasons, by disguising as a trustworthy entity in an electronic communication.[1][2]

en.wikipedia.org...

Not polite to phish and many times it was designed to hurt the software. Still it doesn't attack unless you activate it is my understanding.
ETA
Yes it is a form of Hacking.... You have to assist them is what I am trying to assert.

a reply to: Justoneman

Phishing does not install anything.
It is an attempt to trick someone into providing sensitive information.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Justoneman

Phishing does not install anything.
It is an attempt to trick someone into providing sensitive information.

It will attach to a file, let's say in a bad place to not be too specific but there are various files that are targeted from email to operating system. Then the worm starts eating bytes and doing whatever it was engineered to do to a T.

a reply to: Justoneman

How do I know about worms? Well, instead of German for my foreign language I took Computer programming classes which i can get some use from. I am still using some of that knowledge using the modern Adobe business products for one.. I stopped after C++.

a reply to: kurthall



LOL, there was more advertising spent on Facebook for that crap iPhone zoom lens than Russians promoting their ideas. Epic Fail on your part.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Perfectenemy

Yeah right. If Mueller had stacked his team with Pro-Trump people or people that are affiliated with him we would for sure here the same complains about it being biased. It's called conflict of interest.

Stacked his team with pro-Trump people?

Well, that would indicate there was a concerted effort to "stack the deck".

Do we have any evidence of such a thing occurring in this case?

So far we know most of Mueller's picks were Democratic supporters.

Name one person on Mueller's team that we know donated to Trump or Republicans?

The defense rests........

What part of the rule of law or the gravity of the evidence is dependent upon the political beliefs of the investigators?

Everyone has their personal beliefs. If we excluded people because of their political beliefs, we would not have a JD whatsoever.

There is one of two possibilities being presented here. Either they think these democrats are going to ignore or throw out exculpatory evidence or worse still they believe they are going to fabricate condemning evidence.


It's got to boil down to one of those things otherwise what does their political affiliations have to do with their ability to seek out and present evidence?

So which is,it. Are they sneaks or liars. Pretty dirty accusations against people you don't know except for what's written about them in the news.

Also they should be able to point out where their political views played out in the past as far as their ability to do the job.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Justoneman

Phishing does not install anything.
It is an attempt to trick someone into providing sensitive information.

It will attach to a file, let's say in a bad place to not be too specific but there are various files that are targeted from email to operating system. Then the worm starts eating bytes and doing whatever it was engineered to do to a T.

I would say, with your computer programming classes, you should ask for your money back in this particular instance. Think of "Phishing" the way you would if you were talking to someone and they were "fishing" for compliments....its a form of coercion, it has nothing whatsoever to do with technology other than the fact that "Phishing" is the computer term used to associate technologically based mediums (emails, facebook, snapchat, et al.) with the aforementioned attempt at a coercion of data.