A new hacking crew?
pro-Trump hacker trolls ?
let the mudslinging continue!
Going to need lots of popcorn...
A news and comment website for Democratic voters fears data loss after an attack it blames on pro-Trump hacker trolls. DemocraticUnderground.com's forums were hacked and rendered unavailable on Tuesday afternoon "apparently by a supporter of Donald Trump". "This person clearly knew what they were doing, and despite our best …
"everyone viewing that page got a login popup from DU that made it past most adblockers."
Really? THAT made it a bit more interesting...
/me wonders if there's an 'army of hackers' out there who are anti-establishment, or at least anti-DEMOCRAT, based on the tone of the article, and the Wikileaks dumps on Mrs. Clinton, etc.
You wonder? It's common knowledge in some of my circles. And with what passes for software today, no interactive site can withstand a targeted attack from teenagers and unemployed white guys with a modicum of tech skills.
Don't worry, if Trump turns out to be as authoritarian as he said he is, they'll turn on him next.
I get all my news from AR15.com, which had these screenshots of the site before it went down. It was hacked, and the forums were flooded by people who correctly predicted that Trump would win the election - an opinion that was not popular at DU (the site is notorious for banning people if they aren't 100% in lock-step with the Democratic Party):
"Yeah, right? I've been told that nearly the entire British population is to the left of Bernie Sanders. If true, that would make Obama seem a staunch bible-thumping Conservative by comparison."
Probably, but not left enough to think Jeremy Corbyn is a viable alternative to the Eton mess we call "The Tory Government".
Tory, for those not in the know, is gaelic for "Highwayman". I think it's an apt name for the bastards.
But that's none of my business.
What he said (in the 2nd debate) was:
“I didn’t think I’d say this but I’m going to say it, and I hate to say it, but if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation because there has never been so many lies, so much deception, there has never been anything like it and we’re going to have a special prosecutor.”
Then Hillary said:
"...it’s just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country.”
In reply, Don said:
“Because you would be in jail.”
So no, he didn't threaten to "throw her in jail." He suggested that with him as President he's appoint a special prosecutor to look at her alleged crimes (finally!), and she would probably end up in jail (because she's guilty as sin). At least that's how I parse his statements.
Of course the "Jail her" lie has now been enshrined in liberal lore for all eternity, so I'm wasting my time trying to correct the record here.
"Of course the "Jail her" lie has now been enshrined in liberal lore for all eternity, so I'm wasting my time trying to correct the record here."
Not at all, we all saw that debate - I still have it on hard disk.
But how long have the GOP been trying to stick something on her ( to use a Trump expression).
A long time, but the Democrat Party and the corporate media shield her very effectively.
By any rational measure the Clinton Foundation is the world's largest slush fund, filled mostly thru influence selling on a grand scale. A pretty small fraction goes to actual charity and the rest fuels the Clinton Lifestyle.
Is that criminal, or is it not? If it's not, then why do lesser individuals go to jail for doing a fraction of that? Al Capone could only dream of such lavish illicit profits!
Of course, now that Mrs. Clinton has no influence to sell, you may expect the Foundation to close up shop shortly. Can't claim it's a charity when no money is going out, can we? And it's too bad for all those foreign leaders who squandered their nation's wealth on a losing horse, but them's the breaks!
....so let me fill you in.
The Democrat Underground is a left-wing site, well to the left of the mainstream Democratic party. However, the owner of the site has supported Hillary Clinton, and his wife was a paid member of Hillary Clinton's staff. About 99% of the posters supported Bernie Sanders, and there were many threads accusing the owner of the site of selling out and taking money from the Clinton campaign. Many posters had their posts and threads deleted by the administrators, and people who would not stop attacking the owner of the site had their accounts deleted and their IP addresses blocked.
So if a disgruntled Sanders supporter hacked the site, that would not be surprising. Moreover, the admins and the owner of the site would most likely try to blame Trump supporters, since they don't want to admit that their own base has turned against them. But that is the most likely explanation.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019