so, you think it is reliable to accept the Russian provided DNC emails at face value? 'cause that is what that wikileaks garbage is. No chance it was modified or edited to push the exact narrative you bought into?
“Well, you know Chuck, again these are connected to a Russian government propaganda effort to destabilize the election,” Kaine responded.
Kaine later added: “The one (email) that has referred to me was flat-out completely incorrect. So I don’t know whether it was doctored or whether the person sending it didn’t know what they were talking about. Clearly, I think there’s a capacity for much of the information in them to be wrong.”
Experts told PolitiFact that there is precedent to support Kaine’s claim. While most of the emails are probably unaltered, they said there is a chance that at least a few have been tampered with in some way.
“I’ve looked at a lot of document dumps provided by hacker groups over the years, and in almost every case you can find a few altered or entirely falsified documents,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of cybersecurity firm Taia Global. “But only a few. The vast majority were genuine. I believe that’s the case with the Podesta emails, as well.”
“I would be shocked if the emails weren’t altered,” said Jamie Winterton, director of strategy for Arizona State University’s Global Security Initiative, citing Russia’s long history of spreading disinformation.
However, some of the emails in the WikiLeaks dump — especially among emails sent to Podesta — don’t have these signatures and can’t be technically verified. And digital signature verification wouldn’t detect tampering by omission, like if the hackers were to withhold certain emails.
I appreciate that you believe it, but those are at best questionable.
If they’re not… that’s pretty easy to show. Instead, the DNC has apologized for them. But yeah. I’m the one buying a narrative. We also have records of them, you know, doing the things that the emails say they did- like blocking Bernie from accessing voter rolls so he couldn’t send mailers or otherwise contact them.
The leak wouldn’t have been as impactful if they weren’t, you know, actively undermining candidates in contradiction to their own convention’s bylaws. But, yes, RuSsIaNs. it’s all the rUsSiAnS fault.
Had they shown proof all it would have accomplished is have folks like you claiming the DNC faked them.
And yes, the Russians were behind the stolen emails of both DNC and RNC. Wonder why only the DNC was published by their propaganda front? The Russian source and their support for Mango Mussolini are both well documented. That you are trying to pretend otherwise fairly well condemns your PoV as entire fantasy. Nice try to further muddy the waters, shrub.
He is a self promoting opportunist and was actively fighting to avoid deportation to the US. He is at best a biased useful tool for disseminating propaganda.
And no, he is in no way a journalist.
Julian Paul Assange is an Australian computer programmer, editor, publisher, and activist who founded WikiLeaks in 2006.
so, you think it is reliable to accept the Russian provided DNC emails at face value? 'cause that is what that wikileaks garbage is. No chance it was modified or edited to push the exact narrative you bought into?
https://www.politifact.com/article/2016/oct/23/are-clinton-wikileaks-emails-doctored-or-are-they-/
“Well, you know Chuck, again these are connected to a Russian government propaganda effort to destabilize the election,” Kaine responded.
Kaine later added: “The one (email) that has referred to me was flat-out completely incorrect. So I don’t know whether it was doctored or whether the person sending it didn’t know what they were talking about. Clearly, I think there’s a capacity for much of the information in them to be wrong.”
Experts told PolitiFact that there is precedent to support Kaine’s claim. While most of the emails are probably unaltered, they said there is a chance that at least a few have been tampered with in some way.
“I’ve looked at a lot of document dumps provided by hacker groups over the years, and in almost every case you can find a few altered or entirely falsified documents,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of cybersecurity firm Taia Global. “But only a few. The vast majority were genuine. I believe that’s the case with the Podesta emails, as well.”
“I would be shocked if the emails weren’t altered,” said Jamie Winterton, director of strategy for Arizona State University’s Global Security Initiative, citing Russia’s long history of spreading disinformation.
However, some of the emails in the WikiLeaks dump — especially among emails sent to Podesta — don’t have these signatures and can’t be technically verified. And digital signature verification wouldn’t detect tampering by omission, like if the hackers were to withhold certain emails.
I appreciate that you believe it, but those are at best questionable.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/11/04/no-the-dnc-didnt-rig-the-democratic-primary-for-hillary-clinton/
If the emails are genuine, they’re genuine.
If they’re not… that’s pretty easy to show. Instead, the DNC has apologized for them. But yeah. I’m the one buying a narrative. We also have records of them, you know, doing the things that the emails say they did- like blocking Bernie from accessing voter rolls so he couldn’t send mailers or otherwise contact them.
The leak wouldn’t have been as impactful if they weren’t, you know, actively undermining candidates in contradiction to their own convention’s bylaws. But, yes, RuSsIaNs. it’s all the rUsSiAnS fault.
Had they shown proof all it would have accomplished is have folks like you claiming the DNC faked them.
And yes, the Russians were behind the stolen emails of both DNC and RNC. Wonder why only the DNC was published by their propaganda front? The Russian source and their support for Mango Mussolini are both well documented. That you are trying to pretend otherwise fairly well condemns your PoV as entire fantasy. Nice try to further muddy the waters, shrub.
Julian assange is a journalist. I trust him to have done his homework.
He is a self promoting opportunist and was actively fighting to avoid deportation to the US. He is at best a biased useful tool for disseminating propaganda.
And no, he is in no way a journalist.
Julian Paul Assange is an Australian computer programmer, editor, publisher, and activist who founded WikiLeaks in 2006.