Another point: Democrats are whining about the lack of IT security and how damaging it is (or was) yet they weren't that upset about the security of Hillary's email server. As a matter of fact, they defended Hillarys decision to risk national security so that she could carry on here quid-pro-quo and money laundering operations at the expense and risk of national security.
Thirdly, Democrats are not claiming that the information discovered in Podesta’s and the DNC emails was wrong. They are only complaining about the fact that they “got caught.”
Lastly, apparently Podesta is an idiot. Only an idiot would use “password” as their password.
“Lastly, apparently Podesta is an idiot. Only an idiot would use “password” as their password.”
and Hillary is an idiot for putting him in a top post.
You can’t blame the Russians. The real problem is the use of computers by Hillary and the DNC. The press is turning the issue on it’s head.
What bothers me... is that nothing would have been said about it if Hillary had won the election. I sincerely believe this.
Another point: Democrats are whining about the lack of IT security and how damaging it is (or was) yet they weren’t that upset about the security of Hillary’s email server. As a matter of fact, they defended Hillarys decision to risk national security so that she could carry on here quid-pro-quo and money laundering operations at the expense and risk of national security.
Thirdly, Democrats are not claiming that the information discovered in Podesta’s and the DNC emails was wrong. They are only complaining about the fact that they “got caught.”
Lastly, apparently Podesta is an idiot. Only an idiot would use “password” as their password.
Yours are the four key points of this issue as far as I’m concerned, and well said.
Nobody would given the slightest crap nor would have any investigation gotten partway to first base had HRC won.
And yes, as horrible and rotten and conniving as the hacking may have been, the fact the HRC left the door wide open with her private server; making the hacking 100, maybe 1000 times times easier AND that she did so strictly for personal enrichment is nothing more than a giant yawn.
I've read elsewhere that it was slightly modified: The at symbol ( @ ) substituted for the letter "a", and the number zero (0) substituted for the letter "o". e.g.: "p@ssw0rd"
(I guess he didn't think of using two dollar signs for the letter "s"es?)
Not that those modifications make that much of a difference. It would just take that 14-year old hacker a few minutes longer to crack.