Fred99:

 

Stan:

Fred99:

 

Stan: I'm skeptical as we have not been offered any evidence and its such a simple "hack" too that even I could pull off wasn't his password literally "password"?

 

 

 

Please don't include / disseminate alt:right  "fake news" in this thread.

 

 

 

You have zero evidence that Podesta's password was "password".

 

 

 

Assange claims to have evidence that it was at one time "p@ssw0rd" but no evidence that this was his password at the time of the hack.

 

 

 

The hack was made after Podesta was taken in by a phishing email - so as that phishing attack was intended to get him to disclose his password - and clearly worked - then the criticism of Podesta's (alleged by Wikileaks and various alt:right sources) weak password is actually not relevant - it's an attempt to try and deflect from the reality that Russia was almost certainly behind the attacks and leaks.

 

 

 

 

 

Wikileaks are probably one of the most trusted source you can get.
And I phrashed that comment as a question as it's something I read (possibly on Reddit or some such thing). I'm a skeptic Fred I'm not an "alt right" apologist please make that distinction.

 

 

 

The material posted by Wikileaks is "selective". 

 

The authenticity of leaked documents may be verifiable, but the agenda of those who leaked the information is not transparent.  Nor is it clear whether Wikileaks selectively withhold or release leaked information given to them with an agenda  

 

Anyway - you have posted (inadvertently) "fake news" - there is no evidence that Podestas password was "password".  There is evidence it wasn't - and a good argument that whatever his password, it didn't really matter as he "gave it away" when he was phished.

 

Alt:right have been trying to create doubt in order to dissociate Russia from the use of the leaked material to influence the US election result.  Based on the evidence the US security agencies have, there's consensus that Russia was deeply involved.

 

What evidence do you have that that is the case? I was under the impression that wikileaks critics said they posted too much uncensored material

I have asked the question wasn't his password "password" you said no and I accept that I will look into it later.

There is still no evidence that Russia was involved, its such a simple "hack" that anyone could have done it. Julian Assange the receiver of the information has said the person was not Russian I take him at his word. The CIA report added literally zero evidence that Russia was involved why should I take the CIA at there word there job is literally overthrowing foreign governments elected or not.