Trump's under the radar, batshyte crazy reference to Crowdstrike.

OK so you don't really know that the DNC ran a virtual datacenter. That's what I thought.

 

And you don't really read the posts that might threaten your dogma. That's what I thought.

Trump relies so much on the ignorance in as many areas as possible of his followers. But he has a special place in his heart for those who, after receiving the facts, refuse to educate themselves.

 

I think what the White House is really hiding is that Trump has lost his mind. His persona contains some potent social disorders, complete lack of concern for others (with the possible exception of his family), overwhelming narcissism and the need to always be the center of attention, and extreme paranoia.

These disorders are bordering on neuroticism. An illustration of all this might be when Trump used a five day old NWS map to warn the people of Alabama of a hurricane that was coming nowhere near Alabama. That was bad enough and worthy of a good laugh. The matter would be over in a day.

Except, Trump would not let it go. For a solid week he defended his absurd forecast, and even enlisted the help of his chief of staff, his commerce secretary, and NOAA.

There is definitely something wrong with a man who would go that far to convince others a horrible mistake was nothing of the kind. The furor died off when Trump admitted he was solely responsible for inviting the terrorist sponsors of Al Qaeda to Camp David four days before the anniversary of 9/11.

 

Why so hostile? I've read, and responded to all kinds of posts in this and other threads. But you forget that at this point, the onus is on you. You are the one (not just you of course) who has been more or less continuously wrong on just about every scandal during the Trump era that you've taken a position on. I've been right, or at least far more right than wrong during that same period. So in this case, you posted something as fact when you really had no idea if it was fact, you just assumed it was, and when I called you on it, you're pissed off.

If you really think the DNC had a virtual data center and had no inhouse computer network prior to the hack than make that case, don't just make it up, like you just did. You trying to pass off your thoughts and prayers as facts have nothing to do with my "dogma."

The fact that you just got caught trying to fake a "fact" about alleged DNC virtual data centers and blame that on the ignorance of Trump followers shows why your rather consistent record of inaccuracy and conspiracy mongering is likely to continue.

 

Trump must be on to something if just the word "crowdstrike" triggers so many left-wingers.

 

WHERE IS THE DNC SERVER?????

 

There is no definitive proof that Russia hacked anything. It could have been China, North Korea or an inside job.

 

The above poster seems to revel in posting Russian agitprop

 

The Stone team has been trying to introduce the rat—-er’s CrowdStrike theory into his trial and obviously the judge denied the motion two days ago.

I don’t think the tinfoil hat crowd realizes what’s actually afoot. The nut jobs they’re following are trying to re-litigate 2016 and rehabilitate Manafort and Russia. Sanctions and subsequently money is all this unholy alliance has been about.

Unfortunately, they’re about to learn the hard way AND I don’t wish that on anyone. Get while the gettin’ is good.

Did I use the “hyphen” correctly?

 

This isn't just a batcrap crazy conspiracy theory....it's one being pushed Russia to rehab their image and get sanctions removed

 

I believe I have been absolutely right in every single scandal regarding Trump. The fact that the only defense Trump has relied on is stonewalling speaks in my favor. And the fact that you just feel an urge to "say" that I'm wrong... but none to show it with some quote, seals the deal.

As for how "right" you have been... I guess I don't follow you as closely as you follow me so I can't be sure. But I do know that I just explained something relevant to you and, you clearly understood it on your first reply, and then suddenly "un-understood" it in your second... well... I'm am required by forum rules to assume that you may not have read it attentively enough. Though I can think of several more likely explanations.

The DNC doesn't "have" a data center. They rent a tiny small part of one which they set up as a virtual server. (or several virtual servers) How do I know? Because I know I.T. But you don't have to believe me. Ask any I.T. expert in the world if an operation like the DNC during presidential elections would be on in-house equipment.

But here's the definite proof: because when the FBI asked for the server, the DNC didn't turn it over and the FBI had no issues. Of course, this requires a minimal capacity of deduction which forum rules require us to assume all posters have. And I do assume that, but you can argue that you are the exception, if you want. However, if you are arguing that, you should state it explicitly, so we know. I don't mean to be hostile, but you must understand that time is limited and one prefers to use it to debate with people who do value reason and logic. I'm trying really really hard to be polite here....

 

If by "triggered" you mean reacting to Don's belief in unfounded conspiracy theories the question is why aren't you triggered?

 

[QUOTE="Lee Atwater, post: 1071005096, ...........and then..........provide a credible refutation of the facts.

[/QUOTE]

Which facts? The facts that the DNC refused to allow the FBI access to the server in question? I am not refuting those facts, I actually agree that the dems committed a federal crime.

 

The garbage you are responding to is a prime example of how Trump and his media cohort try to muddy the waters with these baseless claims.

 

Baseless claims that have ORIGINATED in the Kremlin for their benefit

 

Gee, what a coincidence.

 

At this point, if you have some actual, substantial links that can prove that prior to the DNC hack, that they had a virtual data center with no onsite system, I'm willing to listen. Until then, your credibility of pronouncing something on your say so is a bit thin.

 

"baseless claim" in this case means demand for actual facts instead of a "baseless claim."

Words seem to mean the opposite of their real meaning to you huh?

 

Since Crowdstrike admitted botching a job they did in Ukraine what is so unusual to question their effort at the DNC -- being the only outfit that had access to analyze the DNC servers for Russian hacking.

 

Sure. Link are below. These are the clearest explanations to understand I could find that could be understood by a non-technical person. I don't need your feedback, though. I have enough years of experience with datacenters to know when somebody is questioning something so absolutely obvious for purely political partisan reasons, and not because they have any point that may be worth the while to debate.

Now you know the facts. it's up to you if you choose to continue repeating senseless wingnut media talking points. Now you are aware that people who have even so much as a vague concept of I.T. will point and laugh at your "conspiracy theories"

https://www.atlantech.net/blog/best-for-business-data-center-vs.-server-room
https://www.apmdigest.com/5-benefits-of-data-center-consolidation

 

What botched job?

How Trump’s Ukraine Mess Entangled CrowdStrike
https://www.wired.com/story/trump-ukraine-call-crowdstrike-dnc-russia/

Trump’s weird reference to “CrowdStrike” during the Ukraine call, briefly explained
Trump still thinks his own intelligence agencies are wrong about who hacked the DNC — and he wanted Ukraine’s help to prove it.
https://www.vox.com/2019/9/25/20883373/trump-crowdstrike-ukraine-call-explained

CrowdStrike cooperated with the FBI’s investigation of the hacks but Trump has nonetheless repeatedly pushed baseless conspiracy theories suggesting that information was somehow withheld from the bureau because CrowdStrike didn’t turn over a physical server to the FBI, and was therefore involved in a cover-up that resulted in the Russia investigation. (This isn’t how the relevant technology works, but more on that later.)

I don't know what's worse. That our prez believes in this batshyte crazy stuff or so many of his supporters believe it without doing any research.

 

What the f...?

Neither of your links say the DNC had, prior to the DNC hack, a virtual data center with no onsite system. Your two links actually provided NO facts to make your case.

I have no doubt that you think they did however. All I can think of is that you are not well. You don't need to be posting inanity on a political forum, you need to be taking care of yourself and try to work through this obvious break with reality.

 

Sonny, you need a reality check. How else would The DNC communicate with 50 individual states, except thru a virtual data center?

 

Yes they do! But, you are required to apply the minimal power of deduction I mentioned a couple of posts back. And which I am required to assume you are capable of. I even did the work for you a couple of posts before that.

But if you refuse to do that or, for whatever reason, are unable to.... then I can't help you.

 

It all fits together like a puzzle. Crowdstrike was one of the contractors that Admiral Rogers found out was somehow able to get into the NSA data banks using the FBI computer system.

Rogers shut that down in October of 2016 and guess what almost immediately followed? Yep, the FISA warrant stream.

If Barr gets a hold of that server, who know how many bad actors would be exposed.... How many Senators like Warner and Durbin would be implicated?

And best of all, it would verify that the Russian hacking hoax was a fraud all along.